U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–029 PDF 2017

PLANNED PARENTHOOD’S TAXPAYER FUNDING 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2015 

Serial No. 114–153 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://www.house.gov/reform 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan 

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

ROD BLUM, Iowa 

JODY B. HICE, Georgia 

STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

WILL HURD, Texas 

GARY J. PALMER, Alabama 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan 

TED LIEU, California 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

MARK DESAULNIER, California 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

SEAN MCLAUGHLIN, Staff Director 

ANDREW DOCKHAM, General Counsel 

SEAN HAYES, Healthcare, Benefits and Administrative Rules Subcommittee Staff Director 

SHARON CASEY, Deputy Chief Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on September 29, 2015 ..................................................................... 1 

WITNESSES 

Ms. Cecile Richards, President, Planned Parenthood Federation of America 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 9 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 12 

APPENDIX 

Representative Gerald E. Connolly Statement ..................................................... 108 

July 27, 2015 Organizations to Congress Supporting Planned Parenthood 

submitted by Ms. Duckworth .............................................................................. 110 

Aug 3, 2015 Latino Organizations to Congress Supporting Planned Parenthood submitted by Ms. Lawrence ....................................................................... 114 

Aug 25, 2015 GPS Fusion Analysis Center for Medical Progress Videos submitted by Ms. Watson Coleman .......................................................................... 116 

Sept 28, 2015 Coalfire Digital Forensics Analysis Report submitted by Mr 

Chaffetz ................................................................................................................. 126 

Sept 21, 2015 Committee Democrats to JEC - Planned Parenthood GOP 

politics submitted by Mr. Cummings ................................................................. 140 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

PLANNED PARENTHOOD’S TAXPAYER 

FUNDING 

Tuesday, September 29, 2015 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jason Chaffetz [chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Chaffetz, Mica, Turner, Duncan, Jordan, Walberg, Amash, Gosar, DesJarlais, Gowdy, Farenthold, 

Lummis, Massie, Meadows, DeSantis, Mulvaney, Buck, Walker, 

Blum, Hice, Russell, Carter, Grothman, Hurd, Palmer, Cummings, 

Maloney, Norton, Clay, Lynch, Cooper, Connolly, Cartwright, 

Duckworth, Lawrence, Lieu, Watson Coleman, Plaskett, 

DeSaulnier, Boyle, Welch, and Lujan Grisham. 

Also Present: Representatives Black, Love, Jackson Lee, and 

Adams. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will come to order. 

Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at 

any time. 

The chairman is responsible under the rules of the House and 

the rules of the committee to maintain order and preserve decorum 

in the committee room. Members of the audience are reminded that 

disruption of congressional business is a violation of law and a 

criminal offense. We welcome your presence, but we will not tolerate disruption. We hope to have a good, lively debate. This is 

what Congress is intended to do, and we need everybody in this 

room—we need everybody’s participation along the way. 

This is an important topic. At the risk of getting a little personal, 

my wife Julie and I have been married some 24 years. We have our 

25th wedding anniversary coming up in February. I’m proud of my 

wife. She got her degree in psychology later in life after helping to 

raise three kids. Some are still at home. She has started to work 

for a plastic surgeon. This plastic surgeon is involved in helping 

women who are having to have their breasts removed, and my wife 

spends her day helping these women. And I’m proud of her for 

doing that. 

My mother, she passed away when I was 28 years old. She 

fought cancer for more than 10 years. She had breast cancer. And 

I miss her. I lost my father to cancer, as well. 

Cancer in this country kills about 1,500 people a day—a day. 

And yet our Federal Government only spends about $5 billion to 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

fight it. If they were shooting 1,500 people a day, if there were 

rockets coming in, we’d be fighting this with everything we’ve got. 

And as I said before I came to Congress and I’m saying here 

today, as fiscally conservative as I can possibly be, we don’t spend 

enough on cancer. We don’t spend enough. We need to spend more. 

I would quadruple the amount of money, if I had my chance, to 

fight cancer and win. 

And the reason I’m passionate about the hearing today is we’ve 

got a lot of healthcare providers who I think in their hearts know 

that they’re trying to provide good, but the question before us is, 

does this organization, does Planned Parenthood really need Federal subsidy? Does it need Federal dollars? 

Every time we spend a Federal dollar, what we’re doing is we’re 

pulling money out of somebody’s pocket and we’re giving it to somebody else. What I don’t like, what I don’t want to tolerate, what 

I don’t want to become numb to is wasting those taxpayer dollars. 

And, as best I can tell—we’re going to have a hearing here—this 

is an organization that doesn’t need Federal subsidy. 

For the year ended June 14—June of 2014, I should say, Planned Parenthood reported $127 million in revenue over expenses. They 

had $127 million more in revenue than they had in expenses. Yet, 

between 2005 and 2013, in large part under Ms. Richards’ leadership, there’s a 53-percent reduction in cancer screenings, a 42-percent reduction in breast exams and breast care. I don’t understand 

why. I don’t understand why. 

Let me give you a sense of the numbers that we’re talking about 

here. Government dollars from taxpayers going to Planned Parenthood is roughly $528 million. $450 million of that comes in Federal 

funds. Roughly $390 million comes in the form of Medicaid. 

There’s going to be a lot of bluster today about shutting down the 

government over Planned Parenthood. The funding amount that 

we’re talking about under Title X is $60 million. Remember, I just 

told you that, last year—last year, they had more than $100 million in revenue without expenses. And we’re talking about $60 million, roughly 4.6 of their total revenue. 

Planned Parenthood is an organization with massive salaries. 

Ms. Richards makes nearly $600,000 a year. The affiliate—the person that runs the affiliate in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South 

Dakota makes roughly $450,000 a year. And I could be here for a 

long time listing out some very exorbitant salaries. 

This is also an organization that seems to have exorbitant travel 

expenses. 2013, they spent more than $5 million in travel—firstclass tickets, private chartered aircraft. Roughly, they’re spending 

$14,000 a day on travel. That’s a lot. That’s money that isn’t going 

to women’s health care. 

In 2012 and 2013, they spent roughly $600,000 on blowout parties—chocolate and champagne events, and Salt-N–Pepa came and 

performed a concert, and all kinds of celebrities and other hoopla. 

These are things they lost money doing, according to their tax 

record. 

In the past 3 years, they’ve spent more than $67 million on fundraising. They’re pretty good at it. That’s partly my point. They’re 

pretty good at fundraising. They don’t necessarily need taxpayer 

dollars to go pay for it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

And this part I really hope we do have a deeper discussion about. 

We may not learn everything that we need to, but, over the past 

5 years, more than $22 million has been transferred from their 

501(c)(3) to 501(c)(4) organizations as well as PACs. This is advocacy, it’s lobbying, it’s ‘‘get out the vote.’’ And, in one case in Alaska, it was about redistricting. 

Ladies and gentlemen, that has absolutely nothing to do with 

providing health care to young women who need a breast exam or 

need to get a mammogram. None of that money goes to that. It’s 

a political activity. I was, I guess, naive but surprised that you 

could take 501(c)(3) money and simply give it to the 501(c)(4). 

Shared employees. If you look at Planned Parenthood and the 

other organizations underneath it, you’re going to find shared employees, shared facilities, mailing lists, shared assets. It’s a political 

organization. And that’s something that needs to be ferreted out. 

Then when you start saying, ‘‘Oh, they have to have Federal 

money, they have to have Federal money,’’ over the past 5 years, 

they’ve spent more than $32 million sending money overseas. It 

didn’t even come to the United States of America. It didn’t affect 

people in low-income situations. They’re so flush with cash, they 

started sending and giving out money overseas. I don’t understand 

that. We have USAID, we have the State Department, we have all 

kinds of foreign aid. We don’t need Planned Parenthood foreign aid. 

But that’s what we got. And their desire for more of taxpayer dollars is just sensational. 

There are going to be some discussions today, I’m sure, about the 

video, or videos. Let me just explain that. I know I’ve gone over 

time, but we’re going to have to address it one way or the other, 

so let me address it. 

I think it was legitimate to look at all of the videos—all of the 

videos. So we issued a subpoena to get all of the videos. 

Now, in California, there’s a court case where there is a temporary restraining order that doesn’t allow the producers of these 

videos to release them publicly. So we actually sent a letter asking 

for the videos. 

Democrats, I think the record will reflect, didn’t want us to ask 

for the videos. They wanted to take that language out. Nevertheless, we moved forward and actually went to the extraordinary step 

of subpoenaing—something, I think, that actually both sides of the 

aisle should support. If you want the totality of the record, let’s 

send a subpoena for all the videos. 

Now, with the temporary restraining order in place, there is conflict between the legislative branch and the judicial branch. And so 

what we’re seeing here is they, on one hand, have a restraining 

order, can’t send the videos; on the other, they have a duly issued 

subpoenaed from the United States Congress. That is going to have 

to work itself out. 

There has been discussion about the producer of this video coming and testifying before Congress. I don’t know which direction 

we’re going to go to that. The first step, though, is seeing all the 

videos—all the videos. 

Democrats have said, well, they’ve been doctored, they’ve been 

edited, even though they haven’t even necessarily seen them. And 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

then they have videos that they want to show that show that. Well, 

the reason that they’re out there is that they’re publicly available. 

So there is more to this story, there is more that needs to come 

out. But that’s going to have to play itself out. 

The prime thrust of this hearing today is about the finances. We 

were very clear and blunt in our—in what we were talking about 

in terms of what we’re trying to accomplish here today. I have 

great latitude to members; they can ask what they want to ask. 

But the focus of what we’re doing today is how this organization 

is funded and how they spend their money. If they’re going to accept taxpayer dollars, they’re going to have to withstand the scrutiny of Congress asking tough questions about how they spend that 

money. And that’s the direction that I’m coming from today. 

And if there is more clarification needed, please let me know, but 

we will now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Cummings. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And let me be clear from the very beginning, we have asked for 

all of the tapes, Mr. Chairman, and we wanted all of it, everything. 

And we would, of course, welcome a subpoena for everything, because we think that that goes to the integrity of this committee 

and it goes to the integrity of this Congress. 

Today’s hearing is very important. It will reveal whether this 

committee is more interested in facts or fiction. The questions 

members pose will show whether they are engaged in an evenhanded search for the truth or a partisan attack based on ideology. 

The way we conduct ourselves will demonstrate whether this committee is seeking integrity in our investigation or is being usurped 

by the most extreme forces of partisan warfare. 

Let’s look at the facts. David Daleiden and his group engaged in 

a 3-year campaign of deceit against Planned Parenthood. They set 

up fake companies, created fake identities, repeatedly lied about 

who they were, and secretly recorded Planned Parenthood employees without their knowledge or consent. These are facts that Mr. 

Daleiden admitted to. He admitted to this. 

Mr. Daleiden’s goal for the past 3 years was to entrap Planned 

Parenthood into selling fetal tissue for profit—selling it for profit. 

He deceived, misled, and essentially conned Planned Parenthood 

employees to try to achieve his goal. He gave them illegal contract 

proposals, he offered them huge sums of money, and he pursued 

them relentlessly. Some would say he was obsessed. 

Despite his best efforts, Mr. Daleiden failed. There’s no credible 

evidence before this committee that any Planned Parenthood employee agreed to any proposal to sell fetal tissue or for profit in violation of the law. 

Republicans keep making this claim over and over again, but 

that does not make it true. 

When Mr. Daleiden was faced with the failure of his 3-year effort, he did not relent. Instead, he took the video footage he had, 

manipulated it, and put it out to the public. He removed every single time Planned Parenthood employees rejected his offers. He edited out all of this exculpatory evidence, and he twisted what was 

left to distort the truth. Something is awfully wrong with that picture. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

Last week, all the committee members on this side of the aisle 

asked for Mr. Daleiden to testify here today. Since his video is at 

the fundamental basis of this committee’s investigation, we wanted 

to ask questions about his tactics and his evidence. That’s only fair. 

But Republicans refused. They did not want him to testify. They 

don’t want to subject him to the difficult or uncomfortable questions that relate to the actual facts. 

But the facts are, indeed, critical. And here are some of the key 

facts we now know. 

Federal law authorizes fetal tissue research, and it expressly allows for recouping reasonable costs. That’s a fact. That law was 

passed by Congress with strong bipartisan support based on the 

work of President Ronald Reagan’s blue-ribbon panel on fetal tissue 

research in 1988. 

This is also a fact. Planned Parenthood receives no Federal funding for fetal tissue donation programs, and only 1 percent of 

Planned Parenthood’s health centers even participate in these programs. Those are facts. 

Unfortunately, I suspect these facts will have little impact on the 

Republican talking points, and they will just keep accusing 

Planned Parenthood of selling fetal tissue for profit. 

Today’s hearing is supposed to be about Federal funding, so let 

me highlight one more fact. Republicans have been saying that 

Planned Parenthood receives a half a billion dollars in taxpayer 

funds. They make it sound as if the Federal Government writes a 

check to Planned Parenthood each year. But the vast majority of 

that funding, approximately $400 million, comes from reimbursements from individual health services under Medicaid. 

Medicaid provides healthcare services for people who are poor, elderly, and have disabilities. In my home State of Maryland, banning funds for Planned Parenthood would have a negative and disproportionate impact on poor women, who rely on Planned Parenthood for a host of healthcare services, including pap tests, breast 

exams, and cancer screenings. 

And, Mr. Chairman, as I listen to you talk about cancer and 

breast cancer, I agree with you; we need every dollar we can get 

for research with regard to these diseases. As you know, on Friday 

I’ll be funeralizing my mother-in-law, who was very dear to me, 

who died from breast cancer less than a week ago. So I understand 

what you’re talking about. I get it. 

And a lot of people who need these services are like—are the people who live in our districts, and they live in areas where they do 

not have these services. And I’m sure Ms. Richards will testify with 

regard to that. And so, for many poor women, Planned Parenthood 

may be one of their only sources of medical care in underserved or 

rural communities. 

That brings us to the big question for my Republican colleagues: 

Do you really want to do this? Do you really? Do you want to align 

yourselves with the radical extremists who manipulate the facts? 

And, most importantly, do you want to attack millions of women 

who have a constitutional right, affirmed by the Supreme Court of 

the United States of America, to make their own healthcare decisions with the advice of their doctors? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

Based on the evidence of last week, it appears that you do. You 

threatened to shut down the government. You ousted your Speaker. 

And now you want to set up yet another select committee to investigate. It looks like you have made your choice. 

Unfortunately, I think your actions will result in even more 

chaos and discord in this Congress, which is exactly what the 

American people don’t want. They do not want the discord. 

Ms. Richards, I want to thank you very much for being here 

today to give us the facts. Your group has been extremely helpful 

during this investigation, providing tens of thousands of pages of 

documents. Your cooperation stands in stark contrast to Mr. 

Daleiden, whose notable absence speaks volumes. 

And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We have agreed to allow the subcommittee 

chairmen to also make opening statements. So we’ll now recognize 

the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits, and 

Administrative Rules, Mr. Jordan of Ohio, for his opening statement. 

Mr. JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this hearing, and thank you for your heartfelt remarks in your opening 

statement. 

Here’s the troubling truth: A picture is worth a thousand words. 

You can say all you want that these things were heavily edited, 

they were changed, but if that’s the case, why did Ms. Richards 

apologize for the videos 2 days after they first surfaced? 

Everyone knows these videos are, as the Speaker of the House 

said, barbaric and repulsive. And this argument, this argument 

that we keep hearing from the other side, ‘‘Republicans want to 

shut down the government,’’ are you kidding me? We want to fund 

the government at the levels everyone agreed to, the Ryan-Murray 

budget, the levels the—the levels the President agreed to. 

We simply want to shift the money from an organization caught 

doing what they were caught doing and give it to the community 

health centers; shift it from the 700 Planned Parenthood clinics, 

give it to the 13,000 federally approved community health centers; 

take the money from the guys doing the bad things and give it to 

the ones who aren’t; take the dollars from one private company 

doing what the Speaker said, barbaric things, and give it to federally approved community health centers. 

Now, if the Democrats insist that, in spite of all that, this organization should still get your tax dollars and that that somehow is 

more important than funding our troops, our veterans, and, frankly, women’s health issues and some of the things the chairman 

talked about in health care, if that’s their position, then they can 

go defend that position. 

So let’s just be honest here. This is what this—what this is really 

all about, plain and simple: money and politics. Here’s how it 

works. Politicians give money to Planned Parenthood, who give it 

back to politicians at election time who get elected and give it back 

to Planned Parenthood, who give it back to politicians who get 

elected, and the game plays on. 

In 2012, in that election cycle, Planned Parenthood spent almost 

$12 million in advertising. Fact: $11,874,052, 100 percent of that 

went to Democrats. Every penny—every single penny went to 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 

Democrats. No wonder they’re defending this repulsive game. Politicians give money to Planned Parenthood, they give it back to politicians, and it keeps on going. 

The nice thing about these videos, it’s lifted the curtain. We can 

now see what’s going on there. And that’s why we should fund the 

government and shift the money from this organization to organizations who didn’t do this kind of behavior. 

And, with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize Ms. Maloney of New York for her opening 

statement. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And welcome, Ms. Richards. 

Last week, the Democratic members of this committee sent a letter warning our chairman that the relentless campaign by the conservative House Freedom Caucus to attack Planned Parenthood 

was in fact part of a broader power struggle to unseat Speaker 

Boehner led by an extreme wing of the Republican Party that is 

using this issue to force a government shutdown unless the Speaker bows to their demands. 

Our warnings proved prescient. On Friday, Speaker Boehner announced that he will resign at the end of next month, but not before creating a new select committee to investigate Planned Parenthood. 

Make no mistake, despite what we hear from the other side, Republicans are doubling down on their war against women. 

I request unanimous consent to place in the record this letter 

from the Republicans threatening to close down the government 

unless Planned Parenthood is defunded. And there is—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mrs. MALONEY. And when you read this, there are certain things 

that jump out. All of the signatories are men, none of whom will 

get pregnant or need a cervical screening for cancer or a mammogram or a pap smear or other lifesaving services that are provided 

by Planned Parenthood. 

We will hear today lots of arguments to justify the extreme actions of the Center for Medical Progress, those who created these 

videotapes, but there is one simple reason we are at this point: Republicans want to outlaw a woman’s right to choose. 

Republicans say that this is all about videos purporting to show 

violations of our laws, but when the facts come out that contradict 

their narrative and it comes to light, it never seems to matter. 

For example, when we learned that the videos had dozens of unexplained edits removing phrases like, quote, ‘‘We do not profit 

from tissue donation,’’ from those who work for Planned Parenthood, that did not matter. 

When we learned that less than 1 percent of Planned Parenthood 

centers had any involvement whatsoever in fetal tissue donation, 

that did not matter. 

When we learned that some Planned Parenthood centers involved in tissue donation took the extra precaution of accepting no 

reimbursement for their costs, far beyond what is even required by 

Federal law, that did not matter. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
8 

When we learned that Planned Parenthood centers that lawfully 

accepted reimbursement recouped only their costs and repeatedly 

refused offers from anti-abortion extremists to entrap them into accepting far larger amounts, even in one case 10 times more, Republicans still insisted they were trying to profit from these donations. 

The righteous rhetoric we’ve heard for weeks about Planned Parenthood trafficking in baby parts has one fundamental law: It is 

not true, and it never has been true. But it makes for great sound 

bite. 

The reason the facts don’t matter is that this whole episode is 

not about tissue donation or the Hyde Amendment or Medicaid reimbursement. The core issue is that Republican Members of Congress now almost universally oppose a woman’s right to choose. 

They oppose the constitutional right of abortion. 

An increasing number, like Senator Marco Rubio, support banning abortion with no exceptions, none whatsoever, not even in 

cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is threatened. 

The majority of Americans disagree with these extreme views, 

and we will do everything we can to stop them. Because if we don’t, 

there will be serious consequences for women across this country 

that rely on the services—lifesaving services. It is their choice, of 

over 2.7 million women, to have their basic healthcare services provided by Planned Parenthood. 

In 103 counties with a Planned Parenthood health center, 

Planned Parenthood serves all of the women obtaining publicly 

supported contraceptive services. There aren’t any community 

health centers that can step in to fill the void. If we don’t continue 

this lifesaving service, women will be denied health care across this 

great Nation. 

This continued assault on constitutionally protected reproductive 

freedom is based on outright falsehoods and lies, backed up by 

fraudulent recordings selectively edited by radical anti-choice activists. 

And if they have their way, over 630,000 patients will lose access 

to birth control, STD screenings, and other reproductive health 

care, mammograms, cervical cancer screenings. 

We need to recognize this fight for what it is: It’s about banning 

a woman’s right to choose. And it is being driven by politicians, 

most of whom are men, who think they have the right to dictate 

to women about their most private healthcare decisions. 

And I might add that Planned Parenthood polls four times 

stronger than Congress. And I might add that we should be investigating this group that did fraudulent, edited tapes and not a distinguished healthcare-providing, health—lifesaving group that is 

across this Nation saving lives and providing basic reproductive 

health care to American women, many of whom are very poor and 

many of whom are very vulnerable. 

So I want to publicly thank Planned Parenthood. One in five 

women in America have gone to Planned Parenthood for services, 

including myself, at times in their life when they needed it. And 

I want to thank you for the work that you are doing to provide 

basic healthcare, reproductive healthcare services to American 

women and men. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
9 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I will hold the record open for 5 legislative 

days for any members who would like to submit a written statement. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We’ve had wide interest from a number of 

our colleagues and from broader House membership. I’d ask unanimous consent that the Congresswoman Ms. McMorris Rodgers of 

Washington, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, Congresswoman Black of Tennessee, and Congresswoman Love of Utah 

be allowed to fully participate in today’s hearing. 

If there are additional Democrats that would like to participate, 

I’d be happy to waive them in, as well, to have an even balance. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

We’ll now recognize our witness. Please welcome Ms. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. 

Ms. Richards, pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be 

sworn in before they testify. If you will please rise and raise your 

right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about 

to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

Thank you. 

Let the record reflect that the witness answered in the affirmative. 

In order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate if you 

would limit your testimony to 5 minutes. And, obviously, your entire written statement will be made part of the record. 

Ms. Richards, you’re now recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT, PLANNED 

PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’m proud to be here today speaking on behalf of Planned Parenthood, a leading provider of high-quality reproductive health care in 

America. One in five women in this country has sought care from 

a Planned Parenthood health center, and they trust us because our 

rigorous healthcare standards have been developed with the Nation’s top medical experts over our 99-year history. 

There has been a great deal of misinformation circulated about 

Planned Parenthood recently, and I want to be absolutely clear at 

the outset: The Federal funding that Planned Parenthood receives 

allows our doctors and clinicians at our health centers to provide 

birth control, cancer screenings, and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Now, while the Federal policy, in my 

opinion, discriminates against low-income women, no Federal funds 

pay for abortion services at Planned Parenthood or anywhere else, 

except in the very limited circumstances allowed by law. These are 

when the woman has been raped, has been the victim of incest, or 

when her life is endangered. 

Planned Parenthood operates just like all other health centers 

and hospitals that provide medical care to Medicaid patients. Medicaid reimburses us for the preventive health services that we provide, and the Department of Health and Human Services conducts 

routine audits of the Medicaid program to ensure that these funds 

are used appropriately. And the same is true for the Title X, the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
10 

Federal Family Planning Program, which was signed into law by 

President Richard Nixon. 

Planned Parenthood has been in the news recently because of deceptively edited videos released by a group that is dedicated to 

making abortion illegal in this country. And this is just the most 

recent in a long line of discredited attacks, the tenth over the last 

15 years. 

The latest smear campaign is based on efforts by our opponents 

to entrap our doctors and clinicians into breaking the law. And, 

once again, our opponents failed. 

To set the record straight, I want to be clear on four matters. 

First, using fetal tissue in lifesaving medical research is legal according to the 1993 law passed by the Senate 93 to 4 and based 

on recommendations from a blue-ribbon panel that was created 

under the Reagan administration. 

Second, currently less than 1 percent of Planned Parenthood 

health centers are actually facilitating the donation of tissue for 

fetal tissue research. 

Third, in those health centers, donating fetal tissue is something 

that many of our patients want to do and regularly request. 

And, finally, Planned Parenthood policies not only comply with 

but, indeed, go beyond the requirements of the law. 

The outrageous accusations leveled against Planned Parenthood 

based on heavily doctored videos are offensive and categorically untrue. I realize, though, that the facts have never gotten in the way 

of these campaigns to block women from health care they need and 

deserve. 

And, Mr. Chairman, you and I do disagree about whether women 

should have access to safe and legal abortion. At Planned Parenthood, we believe that women should be able to make their own decisions about their pregnancies and their futures. And the majority 

of Americans agree. We trust women to make these decisions in 

consultation with their families, their doctors, and their faith, and 

not by Congress. 

It is unacceptable that in the 21st century women in America are 

routinely harassed for accessing a legal medical procedure. Doctors 

who provide abortion, as well as their families, often face harassment and threats of violence, and after this recent smear campaign, it’s only gotten worse. These acts against women and 

healthcare providers don’t reflect American values or the rule of 

law, and I hope this committee will condemn them. 

For 99 years, Planned Parenthood has worked to improve the 

lives of women and families in America. And, largely, as a result 

of access to birth control, women are now nearly half the workforce 

in America and more than half of college students. And as a result 

of better sex education and more access to birth control, we are 

now at a 40-year low for teen pregnancy in the United States. 

But for all the progress we’ve made, there is much still to do. For 

many American women, Planned Parenthood is the only healthcare 

provider they will see this year. And it is impossible for our patients to understand why Congress is once again threatening their 

ability to go to the healthcare provider of their choice. 

Two weeks ago, I was in Plano, Texas, with one of these patients, 

Dayna Farris-Fisher. And Dayna can’t be here today because she 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
11 

has a new job and she’s supporting her family, but if she were 

here, Dayna would tell you what she told me: that Planned Parenthood saved her life. 

In 2013, her husband lost his job and, therefore, their health insurance, and not long after, Dayna found a lump in her breast. And 

the only two clinics that would take a patient without health insurance couldn’t see her for at least 2 months. So Dayna came to 

Planned Parenthood for a breast exam. 

And there, our clinician of 21 years, Vivian, guided her through 

the process of followups and referrals and helped make sure that 

her treatment was covered. And she called Dayna repeatedly to 

check on her as she entered treatment. And I am really happy to 

say today that Dayna is now cancer-free. 

Mr. Chairman, I wish this Congress would spend more time 

hearing from women like Dayna. All women in this country deserve 

to have the same opportunities as Members of Congress and their 

families for high-quality and timely health care. And so I want to 

thank you to be here today and the opportunity to testify on behalf 

of Dayna and the 2.7 million patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for high-quality, essential health care every year. 

Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Richards follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
12 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 26029.001
13 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 26029.002
14 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 26029.003
15 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 26029.004
16 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 26029.005
17 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

I’ll now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

Ms. Richards, Planned Parenthood has sent 32-plus-million dollars in grants overseas. Does any of these funds go to the Democratic Republic of the Congo? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congressman, let me tell you—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. No, no, no, no. We don’t have time for a big 

narrative. I just want to know—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not going to give you—you asked me—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. —yes or no. 

Ms. RICHARDS. You asked me a question. 

Any of the money that Planned Parenthood raises and is given 

by foundations and individuals to support family planning services 

around the country is in Africa and in Latin America, and they go 

to individual organizations. I’m happy to provide you a list of those 

organizations, but I did not bring them with me today. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. If you could give us a list of those organizations. 

Does Planned Parenthood have any ownership in foreign—a foreign company? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe so. I don’t know what you mean 

by ‘‘ownership.’’ We have—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well, in your 2013 tax return, it lists $3.3 

million marked as, quote, ‘‘investment,’’ end quote, in Central 

America and the Caribbean. I’m just asking if that investment was 

an actual investment. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We don’t own anything in those countries. What 

our—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Okay. Let me keep going. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Our global—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I have to keep going. I need to get a—I 

would appreciate a list. And you’ve been very cooperative so far. 

Give us a list—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have been extremely cooperative. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah, and I just cited that. If you can give 

us a listing, as you said you would, of where those dollars go overseas, we would very much appreciate it. Your compensation in 2009 was $353,000; is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have the figures with me, but I’m—I don’t 

want to—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It was. Congratulations. 

In 2013, your compensation went up some $240,000. Your compensation, we’re showing and based on your tax returns, is 

$590,000, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s not my annual compensation. Actually, my 

annual compensation is $520,000 a year. I believe there was a retirement—there was a program that the board sort of put together 

for a 3-year—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m happy—again, I think we’ve been extremely 

forthcoming with all of our documents, so—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Let me go to the next one. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Will the chairman yield? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. No, I won’t. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
18 

Planned Parenthood and its lobbying arm, Planned Parenthood 

Action Fund, control two 527 organizations that have their own political activities, Planned Parenthood Votes and Planned Parenthood Action Fund PAC. 

Do they receive money from Planned Parenthood to conduct 

these activities? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is a totally 

separate corporation, receives no Federal dollars whatsoever. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. What about the management? Who manages it? Do you manage it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s managed by a team of people who are employed by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Are you one of those that helps manage it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t directly manage it, no, sir. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Do you help manage it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Some of my time is allocated to it, but I do not 

oversee the—I oversee—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. In 2013, you were listed as a shared employee. In fact, you were compensated with $31,000 to help run 

that organization, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. You asked me—excuse me, sir, but you asked me 

if I ran the organization. Some of my time—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Or do you help run it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Some of my time is allocated to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which is required by law, and we meet all 

of the legal requirements. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. And so you also are involved in the 

Planned Parenthood Action Fund. What—if you could help us understand what the duties are for your $31,000 of contribution. My 

guess is—you’re running the mothership here—when you show up 

and want to have something done, it’s probably done. 

Does Planned Parenthood control any organizations that lobby? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is a separate organization that has its own board and its own fundraising 

and no Federal employees. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Shared employees, shared assets, shared 

lists, shared emails, shared assets. This is the concern. 

Tell me about the—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Could I—I just want to make sure you understood 

my statement, since I know that we’re talking about Federal funds. 

Zero Federal funds are related to the Planned Parenthood Action 

Fund. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It is the commingling that bothers us. 

Every dollar there—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We are—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. No. Hold on. Every dollar that you get in 

a Federal—from Federal dollars means you don’t necessarily have 

to allocate it for these particular assets. So that’s what we’re concerned about. 

Tell me about the $200,000 you gave to the Ballot Initiative 

Strategy Center. What was that for? That was in 2013, as well. 

Ms. RICHARDS. So I’m not familiar with that exact payment, but 

I’m happy—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
19 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well, you gave them $200,000. If you don’t 

know—you’re running this organization. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sir, I—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Let me—let me—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Excuse me, sir. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. No. No. Hold on. Let me list out what their 

goal is. Their mantra is, quote, ‘‘Envisioning a future where progressives change the game and use ballot measures as a political 

and civic engagement tool for victory.’’ And you gave them 

$200,000. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sir, I run an organization that has a budget of 

roughly $200 million, and so when you pull out one figure out of 

the last 5 years, I’m trying to be responsive. 

It’s important—and perhaps you’re not aware that there have 

been many efforts in States over the last several years to pass ballot initiatives that restrict women’s access to birth control and reproductive health care. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. But you’ve also—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. So we’ve absolutely been involved in ballot initiative measures that have been introduced by people—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. This is why I don’t think you need—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —that want to restrict women’s health care. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. If you want to be a private entity, be a private entity, but you don’t need Federal dollars in order to do this. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t use Federal dollars to do that, sir. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. You do to run the organization. Planned 

Parenthood—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Excuse me. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Planned Parenthood has given Planned 

Parenthood Action Fund more than $22 million to exercise what— 

involved in their lobbying expenditures and their advocacy efforts. 

Ms. RICHARDS. None of these—none of the dollars that you are 

discussing are Federal dollars. And the Planned Parenthood Federation of America receives almost no Federal dollars. I think, at 

this point, only $21,000—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. So it goes through the—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —for a clinical trial network—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It goes through the same organization—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —for birth control. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. —and you just separate all that out. 

Let me—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We are highly accountable—excuse me? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. My time—I’ve gone over time. I need to 

show this last slide. This one I don’t understand. 

And, in the case of Dayna, when she came to Planned Parenthood, did she get a mammogram? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. She was referred for a mammogram. Absolutely. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. And that’s part of the challenge, is that you 

don’t do mammograms. So if you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Go ahead. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry, I’ve never—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
20 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. You don’t do mammograms, correct? 

There’s, like, one or two places that does it, but—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. —you don’t do mammograms. 

Ms. RICHARDS. If you would give me one moment—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —to explain. 

Planned Parenthood is a women’s health center, just like every— 

where I go for my breast exams every year. If you need a mammogram, you’re referred to a radiological center, and that’s how 

women actually receive their care. 

And we provide breast exams to—I can get you the numbers of 

how many hundreds of thousands of women received breast exams 

at Planned Parenthood last year. Has nothing to do with—I don’t— 

again—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Here’s the problem. 

Ms. RICHARDS. You created this slide. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. And I will try to wrap up. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have no idea what it is. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well, it’s the reduction over the course of 

years—in pink, that’s the reduction in the breast exams. And the 

red is the increase in the abortions. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. That’s what’s going on in your organization. 

Ms. RICHARDS. This is a slide that has never been shown to me 

before. I’m happy to look at it, and—but it absolutely does not reflect what’s happening at Planned Parenthood. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. You’re going to deny that if we take—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m going to deny—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. —those numbers out of your report—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s a slide that you’ve just shown me, that no one 

has ever provided us before. We’ve provided you all the information 

about everything, all the services that Planned Parenthood provides. And it doesn’t feel like we’re trying to get the truth here. 

You just showed me this; I’m happy to look at it. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I pulled those numbers directly out of your 

corporate report. 

My time has—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Oh, excuse me. My lawyer is informing me that 

the source of this is actually Americans United for Life, which is 

an anti-abortion group. So I would check your source. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Then we will get to the bottom of the truth 

of that. 

We will now recognize Mr. Cummings for a generous 7 minutes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I thought it was 8, Mr. Chairman. I think it’s 8. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Go ahead. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Richards, you know, I often hear women, including my wife, 

talk about the way women are treated as opposed to men. And, not 

being a woman, I at the same time try to be sensitive. So I want 

to just—you know, the chairman just gave you a series of questions. I just have a few other ones. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
21 

Ms. Richards, I find it extremely hypocritical that Republicans 

criticize the salaries of Planned Parenthood officials when you have 

violated no laws, especially while these same Republicans completely ignore the CEOs of huge companies that are actually guilty 

of breaking the law. 

Earlier this year, Citicorp, J.P. Morgan, and other major banks 

pled guilty to manipulating currency markets and interest rates. 

They were fined more than $5 billion for their actions. Yet 

Citigroup’s CEO still received $13 million last year, and J.P. Morgan’s CEO received $20 million. These banks get extensive Federal 

support in the form of borrowing through the Federal Reserve’s discount window and access to deposit insurance through the FDIC. 

Ms. Richards, do you know if House Republicans made any effort 

to strip the banks of their Federal support that I just talked about? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Well, I can tell you. They didn’t. 

Johnson & Johnson, another one, was fined more than $2 billion 

for illegally marketing drugs and paying kickbacks to doctors and 

nursing homes, yet the company’s CEO still received $25 million 

last year. 

Ms. Richards, do you know if the House Republicans conducted 

an investigation of this company or other drug companies that violated the law? Do you? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I do not. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Well, I can answer that for you. No, they didn’t. 

And they also never sought to deny them Federal funding through 

Medicaid or to block their NIH grants. 

Let me go on. Last month, Lockheed Martin was fined millions 

of dollars for using taxpayer funds to lobby Congress to maintain 

its hold on a multibillion-dollar Pentagon contract. Lockheed’s CEO 

received a stunning $33 million last year. 

Ms. Richards, do you know if there has been any investigation 

or any effort—any—to eliminate Lockheed Martin’s Federal funding? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sounds like there hasn’t been. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. You got it. Of course there wasn’t. 

These are huge companies that are actually guilty of breaking 

the law, and their CEOs make millions of dollars. Republicans 

never criticize the salaries of their CEOs, and they never try to 

strip their Federal funding, their government subsidies, or their 

tax breaks. 

But when it comes to women’s health—when it comes to women’s 

health, the Republicans’ approach is completely different. Republicans targeted Planned Parenthood, which provides essential, 

high-quality care to millions of American women more aggressively 

than all of these companies combined. With no evidence of wrongdoing, these Republican investigations multiply, and the political 

theater continues. 

This whole defunding fight is just a pretext for the real Republican agenda—it’s a pretext: Take away the constitutional right of 

women and their doctors to decide what is best for them. I reject 

these shameful—these shameful attacks on women’s health. 

Let me go on. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
22 

Now, Ms. Richards, I want to—again, I want to thank you for 

being here. And Republicans accuse Planned Parenthood of selling 

fetal tissue from abortion for profit. Federal law explicitly allows 

for the reimbursement of reasonable expenses for tissue samples. 

But the Republicans say that Mr. Daleiden’s videos are proof that 

Planned Parenthood was making a profit. 

So, at this time, I’d just like to—do you know who Dr. Deborah 

Nucatola is? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And who is that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. She works for us in our medical division. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I was going to show some clips, but the—our 

friends had some problems with it, so I want to just do some quotes 

from some of the stuff that Mr. Daleiden left on the cutting floor 

when he was doing his—working with the tapes. 

Dr. Deborah Nucatola said, and I quote, ‘‘To them, this is not a 

service they should be making money for,’’ end of quote. That’s left 

on—that was left on the floor. She said also, quote, ‘‘no one’s going 

to see this as a moneymaking thing,’’ end of quote. She went on to 

say, ‘‘We’re not looking to make money from this. Our goal is to 

keep access available,’’ end of quote. 

Another quote that was left on the cutting room floor: ‘‘We really 

just want it to be reasonable for the impact it has on the clinic. 

This is not something—this isn’t a new revenue stream that affiliates are looking at. This is a way to offer patients a service that 

they want, do good for the medical community, and still maintain 

access at the end of the day,’’ end of quote. 

She went on to say another piece on the cutting room floor. You 

know, this was on the floor. Quote, ‘‘Are there affiliates that would 

just donate the tissue for free?’’—or—and then there’s another one. 

And then I’ll just end with this one. Dr. Nucatola said, and I quote, 

‘‘Probably, I mean, really the guidance is, this is not something you 

should be making an exorbitant amount of money on.’’ 

And so let me ask you this. Ms. Richards, I cannot imagine a 

more clear answer than these. I mean, as far as I can tell, Dr. 

Daleiden and his group spent the better part of 3 years—3 years, 

Ms. Richards—trying and failing to entrap Planned Parenthood 

employees. They tried to get someone to sign a contract, agree to 

a sale, or provide even one tissue sample at a price above the reasonable expenses that are allowed under the law. But nobody—nobody has identified a single—a single incident where that occurred. 

Is that right, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. It’s amazing how hard Mr. Daleiden and his 

group tried to get your affiliates to accept more than reasonable expenses. Over and over again, they pressed, they pushed, they cajoled, but they never succeeded. 

So, after they failed in this 3-year effort, when they were unable 

to get even one agreement, they put out these misleading videos instead, and they cut out every single time an employee said, ‘‘No,’’ 

‘‘No,’’ ‘‘No,’’ ‘‘No.’’ 

Ms. Richards, this is my final question as I run out of time. In 

the clips that I just talked about, Dr. Nucatola was not aware that 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
23 

she was being secretly recorded. Do you know whether that’s accurate or not? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s completely accurate. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. So she was sharing the truth; that is, Planned 

Parenthood does not seek to profit from its participation in fetal 

tissue research. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. My time is up. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentlewoman from Wyoming, Ms. 

Lummis, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being with us today. 

My first question is, how many Planned Parenthood clinics have 

mammogram machines? 

Ms. RICHARDS. There aren’t any Planned Parenthood clinics, I believe—to the best of my knowledge, not any have mammogram machines at their facility. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. And how many Planned Parenthood clinics are 

there? 

Ms. RICHARDS. On any given day, between 650 and 700. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. So none, to your knowledge, have a mammogram machine. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Right. We have different kinds of arrangements 

with—depending on the State, to refer women for mammograms. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. And—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. As I said earlier to, I think, the question to the 

chairman, this is—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. And what surgical services does Planned Parenthood provide? Surgical services. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we provide surgical abortions, and we provide colposcopy. We do a variety of services. And, Ms. Lummis—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Can you explain—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —Ms. Lummis, to be responsive, you know, we 

have core services across the country, but some Planned Parenthoods provide broader services. Some—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —provide primary care, et cetera. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. I was just asking about surgical services 

with that question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Tell me—so abortion is included in ‘‘surgical services.’’ But can—I want to find out where you get your 3-percent figure that you cite for abortion procedures. That’s your self-reported 

abortion statistic. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s 3 percent of all the procedures we provide 

in—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. The—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —all the services that we provide. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. 

Well, let’s talk about Planned Parenthood revenue from abortions. If you look at the 2013 statistics that you report, abortions 

from—if you—from revenue would have been over 86 percent of 

your nongovernment revenue. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
24 

How do you explain this massive disparity between the amount 

of revenue you collect from abortion and the fact that you only report 3 percent of your services being abortion? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think there’s two questions you’ve sort of 

mixed in there, so let me try to address both. 

One is, as we’ve already stated, Federal money does not go for 

abortion, so the Federal portion that we were discussing is reimbursement for preventive care services. I think the other—so that’s 

why they’re not—those numbers don’t—aren’t connected. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. How many—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. The—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Can you tell me how many of your affiliates receive the majority of their revenue from abortion? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know that answer. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Could you get it for me? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’ll talk to my team. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Thanks. 

Ms. RICHARDS. But I do think it’s important to understand that 

abortion procedures are probably more expensive than some other 

procedures that we—that we provide, which might, you know, 

might explain what you’re trying to get at. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. 

According to your 2013 tax return—I’m switching now to travel expenses—Planned Parenthood spent over $5.1 million on travel 

last year. So, as the chairman said earlier, that’s nearly $14,000 

per day. 

What is all that money being spent on? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we’re an organization that—we’re in 50 

States. We also, as the chairman has noted, we have programs in 

Latin America and in Africa, as well, where we support family 

planning programs in those—so I can certainly—and I think we 

have provided very detailed information, thousands of pages of both 

our financial statements, our audited financials, our annual report. 

And if there’s anything that we need to break down further, I’m 

happy to do that. 

What I would say, that, again—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. I would very much appreciate it if you would break 

it down, because the taxpayers are funding over 40 percent of 

Planned Parenthood. And my point is they just have a right to 

know how this money is being spent—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Absolutely. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. —and if taxpayer dollars are being used to free up 

services that you provide that are aberrant services in the view of 

many taxpayers, when there are alternatives in this country, 

many, many, 13,000 clinics that cater specifically to women’s 

health. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, Congresswoman Lummis, I’d like to address 

that, Because one of the comments that was made earlier, I wasn’t 

able to respond, is that we don’t get a Federal subsidy. Really it 

is important to understand for everyone here how the Medicaid 

program—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Can you function—let me ask you this—could you 

function on non-Federal dollars? Why do you need Federal dollars? 

You’re making a ton of dough. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
25 

Ms. RICHARDS. We don’t make any profit off of Federal money. And if I could just have a moment to explain, $1.6 million—— 

Mrs. LUMMIS. But you are using Federal dollars and displacing 

money that could go to the 13,000 healthcare clinics. 

My time is up. I yield back. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Could I answer the question? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not sure exactly what the whole question was, 

but I do think it’s really important that you understand that 60 

percent of our patients are receiving either—they are either Medicaid patients or they may be Title X patients. Seventy-eight percent of our patients live at 150 percent of poverty or below, and for 

many of them Planned Parenthood is the only family planning provider that will see them in their area. Half of our health centers 

are in medically underserved communities. 

So it is not a—we are getting—we don’t just get a big check from 

the Federal Government. We, like other Medicaid providers, we are 

reimbursed directly for services provided. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing Ms. Richards to answer the question. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Just as a point of clarification, Ms. Richards, I want to make sure there is no ambiguity here. The gentlewoman from Wyoming asked for a listing of affiliates where the 

majority of revenue comes from abortion services. You said you’d 

talk to your team. Will you actually provide us that list? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I will talk to my team. Just for the record, I am 

here voluntarily. We have provided tens of thousands of pages of 

documents to you. We have provided audited financial statements. 

I will talk to my team and we will do everything we can to be—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. For the record, you have been very cooperative. I just want to keep that rolling. And you were good at agreeing to give other bits of information. Why not this part of information? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t want to commit to anything that I don’t 

actually have. I said I will work with you and your team. We have 

no interest in hiding any information. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. If you have it, will you give it to us? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have it, so I’m just saying to you, I will 

work with my team, and we are working with your staff to provide 

any and all information that we can. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I would hope that that would include the 

request from Mrs. Lummis of Wyoming as well. 

I now recognize the gentlewoman from New York, Mrs. Maloney, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I first would like 

to register my opposition and my objection to the chairman beating 

up on a woman, on our witness today, for making a good salary. 

In the entire time I have been in Congress, I have never seen a 

witness beaten up and questioned about their salary. Ms. Richards 

heads a distinguished organization providing healthcare services to 

millions of Americans, and I find it totally inappropriate and discriminatory. 

Ms. Richards, are you aware that there are over 285 rallies in 

support of Planned Parenthood, including one in my district today, 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
26 

and that many are calling today National Pink Out Day in support 

of the services and life-changing and life-support services of 

Planned Parenthood? Are you aware of that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I am aware of that, and I look forward to changing into pink as soon as these proceedings are finished today. 

Mrs. MALONEY. And are you aware that over 2.7 million men and 

women in America choose Planned Parenthood as their primary 

health provider and that there are two Planned Parenthood clinics 

in the district that I am privileged to represent? And if you go at 

the end of the day, young women and men are lined up through 

the waiting room, out the door, and on some days clear down the 

block waiting for the healthcare services of Planned Parenthood. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m glad to hear that. And, again, we’re pleased 

to provide services to anyone who walks in our door. 

One of the things that I think is very important and refers a little bit to the question earlier is that 60 percent of our health centers are able to see patients on the same day. And I know for many 

women, if they are concerned about a lump in their breast or they 

need birth control, and for some of them they haven’t had an annual exam in many, many years, we are proud to be able to serve 

them with high-quality care when they need it. 

Mrs. MALONEY. And are you aware that this hearing today is 

promoted by a series of deceptively edited and purposely misleading videos that have been found to be deceptively edited by 

leading fact-checking organizations in this country, including five 

States? Five States had their own individual investigations. Now 

it’s six. Missouri did their own review, and they found that they 

are complying, that Planned Parenthood is complying with all 

State laws and regulations regarding tissue donations. 

Now, are you aware of any other efforts by Republicans and others to defund other organizations that provide health care, reproductive health care to women in this country? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware of any, but there may be. 

Mrs. MALONEY. What about attacks on Title X? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think it has been concerning that not only 

are we seeing in this country efforts to end access to safe and legal 

abortion, which is an important right of women in America, but the 

reductions in support for family planning are equally disturbing. 

I’m very encouraged actually that finally we are beginning to see 

some breakthrough. As I said earlier, we have now the lowest teen 

pregnancy in 40 years in America. We are seeing much better birth 

control and through the Affordable Care Act now 50 million women 

getting access to no-cost birth control. I think there is a lot we can 

do to reduce unintended pregnancy in America. 

Mrs. MALONEY. What do you say to those who want to defund 

Planned Parenthood and outlaw abortion altogether in our country? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think what is important to me is, you 

know, at Planned Parenthood we trust women to be able to make 

their own healthcare decisions and to make their decisions about 

where they want to go to for health care. And I know that a lot 

of the members of this committee feel strongly that people should 

be able to go to their own doctor. So this isn’t really an attack on 

Planned Parenthood. This is an attack on 2.7 million patients who 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
27 

each year choose Planned Parenthood as their healthcare provider, 

and I think they should have that right. 

Mrs. MALONEY. And I agree with you completely. We in Congress 

can choose our healthcare provider. Vulnerable men and women 

should likewise be able to choose their healthcare provider. 

I would just like to end by saying that using these videos to justify efforts to defund Planned Parenthood is an extreme abuse, it 

is deceitful, and it undermines the integrity of this committee. 

Thank you. My time has expired. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentlewoman’s time is expired. 

I now recognize the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan. 

Mr. JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, if the videos were selectively edited, heavily edited, 

if this was entrapment, if this was all untrue, then why did you 

apologize? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, Congressman, first I think everyone has 

agreed they were heavily edited and that certainly I think even the 

perpetrator agreed—— 

Mr. JORDAN. My question is, why did you apologize? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The perpetrator has agreed they were done undercover. I spoke with Dr. Nucatola, who was featured in one of the 

videos, and I thought it was important. In my opinion, it was inappropriate to have a clinical discussion in a nonconfidential, nonclinical setting, and I told her that. 

Mr. JORDAN. What were you apologizing for? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That she used, I think, in my judgment, it was 

bad judgment to have a clinical discussion in a nonclinical setting. 

Mr. JORDAN. I mean, the first video comes out July 14. Two days 

later you go and issue an apology. And you said this: ‘‘It’s unacceptable. I personally apologize for the tone and statements.’’ Well, I 

want to know—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I felt like—— 

Mr. JORDAN. No, here is the question. Which statements were 

you apologizing for? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It was really the situation that she was in. And 

I believe that, again, at that—— 

Mr. JORDAN. But, Ms. Richards, that’s not what you said. You 

said: I apologize for statements. I’d like to know, I think the American people would like to know which statements in the video were 

you apologizing for. Were you apologizing for statements that were 

untrue? Because you normally don’t do that in life. If something is 

untrue and false, you don’t apologize for that, you correct the 

record. But that’s not what you said. You said: ‘‘I personally apologize for the tone and statements.’’ 

And I’m asking you a simple question. There was only one video 

at the time you issued this statement, when you did your video. 

There was only one video. I want to know, in that video that you 

were referencing, which statements were you apologizing for? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, Congressman, at the time, as you I’m sure 

remember, that video was released, we’d had no time to actually 

evaluate how much editing had happened. It was days later that 

we were able—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Which true statements in that video were you 

apologizing for, Ms. Richards? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
28 

Ms. RICHARDS. And so I was reflecting that on that video, not 

any particular statement, that given—did not reflect the compassionate care that we provide at Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. JORDAN. Okay. Well, that raises an important question. So 

is what you said in your video untrue, you weren’t really apologizing for statements made? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I was apologizing for what was said in a nonclinical setting, in a nonappropriate way, and I don’t believe—and I 

don’t believe—— 

Mr. JORDAN. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say, I’m 

apologizing for statements in one video, and then not tell us what 

those statements were. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe that Dr. Nucatola—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Or you can do this. You can say:You know what? 

What I said in the video I produced wasn’t true. I really wasn’t 

apologizing for any statement. You can tell us that here on the 

record if you’d like. But it can’t be both positions. It has to be one. 

And I want to know which one is it? And, frankly, the American 

people want to know which one is it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. In my judgment it was inappropriate to have that 

conversation in a nonclinical setting, in a non confidential area 

about clinical matters, and I have told that to Dr. Nucatola. 

Mr. JORDAN. Okay. Why didn’t you say that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I will also tell you, Dr. Nucatola—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Why didn’t you say that? This wasn’t a reporter 

sticking a mic in front of your face. This was a video you produced 

to send out to the whole world. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congressman, we may just have to agree to disagree—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Why didn’t you say that? If that’s what you were 

thinking, why didn’t you say that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We may just have to agree to disagree on this 

matter. I think I’ve explained myself. 

Mr. JORDAN. I don’t think we’re agreeing to disagree. I think 

you’re not answering my question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’ve answered it, I think, repeatedly here. 

And I want to say also for the record—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Real quickly, just for the record, but this to me is 

critical. Because at the moment you did this, there was only one 

video. And then you do your video in response to that video. And 

you made a specific statement. I’m sure your staff worked on the 

issue, prepared it. This probably went through a number of drafts. 

And you were very specific in what you said: ‘‘I apologize for the 

tone and statements.’’ 

So there are obviously statements in that first video that were 

accurate that you didn’t think needed to be out there, and you 

wanted to apologize for it, and you wanted that message heard by 

the American people. And I’m asking you a simple question. In that 

first video—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congressman Jordan—— 

Mr. JORDAN. In that first video, tell me what you needed to 

apologize for? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
29 

Ms. RICHARDS. That highly edited video, that now, of course, as 

we have gotten further and I have read pages—pages and pages 

now—— 

Mr. JORDAN. That highly edited video that you apologized for. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Excuse me. I have now read hundreds of pages 

of all of the things that were said, and what is clear now, that 

there were many, I think 10 times during that conversation, in 

which Dr. Nucatola expressly said—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Ms. Richards, it’s a simple question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I have answered it as best—— 

Mr. JORDAN. It is as simple and as basic as it gets. You don’t 

apologize for things that are inaccurate. You apologize for things 

that are accurate. And you said there were statements in that first 

video that I want to apologize for. I’m asking you to tell this committee chairman, this committee, and the American people, what 

were those statements? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think I have already made my explanation. And just for the record, Dr. Nucatola is an excellent doctor. 

Mr. JORDAN. I’m not saying she’s not. I’m asking what you said. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’d just like—you’ve had your moment. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I wanted to make sure that you understood that 

she provides incredibly compassionate care and I’m proud of her. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

I now recognize the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, 

Ms. Norton. 

Ms. NORTON. Ms. Richards, first I want to thank you for the 

Medicaid funds you do receive. The fact that they are Medicaid 

funds makes its own statement about who you are serving. You are 

serving low-income women in my community and throughout the 

country. I want to thank you for that. 

I want to congratulate you on raising your own funds. You receive a very small grant. You are being investigated by four committees of the United States Congress and the Speaker wants a 

standing committee. None of them have indicated they want to investigate this deceptive tape, which at the moment is enjoined because it may indeed be illegal. Yet, this committee is about uncovering illegal matters, not providing a cover for such matters. 

You know, when I saw this tape I had a sense of dj vu, and I 

asked the staff to look to see, you know, isn’t there some kind of 

pattern here, and discovered that there were nearly 10 of these deceptive sting operations over the past 10 or 15 years. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Ms. NORTON. May I ask you, has any one of those stings uncovered wrongdoing on the part of Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Absolutely not. And thank you, Congresswoman 

Norton, I think it is important to recognize this is a tactic that has 

been used repeatedly, and as you say, 10 times in the last 15 years, 

and every single time it’s been thoroughly discredited. 

Ms. NORTON. You know, and it seems they never learn, Ms. Richards. I want to bring to your attention a sting from 2000 that looks 

remarkably like this one. An anti-abortion extremist approached 

the committee, I think it was the House Energy and Commerce 

Committee, to say that they had evidence that Planned Parenthood 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
30 

was selling fetal tissue for profit, which is, of course, what has been 

alleged by Republicans consistently. 

Of course, there was an investigation, a hearing with this whistleblower, who claimed he had helped Planned Parenthood sell 

fetal tissue for profit and that he had seen intact fetuses at a 

Planned Parenthood clinic. By the way, does that not sound familiar? He said—there was an affidavit at the hearing. He swore that 

in his affidavit—this is somebody who was watching out for perhaps being prosecuted at the hearing—that he had no personal 

knowledge of anyone at Planned Parenthood selling fetal tissue for 

profit. 

During his testimony—this is about 15 years ago—he admitted 

that he was paid by an anti-abortion group to appear in the sting 

video. And I want to quote what he said. ‘‘When I was under oath, 

I told the truth. Anything I said on the video when I was not under 

oath, that is a different story.’’ Does that not sound like the story 

of this video? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think it does. 

Ms. NORTON. I want to know how you can protect yourself as an 

institutional matter, how do you deal with these repeated stings, 

unsuccessful though they are, being approached year after year as 

you attempt to provide health services for low-income women? 

What do you do as an institutional matter with repeated stings to 

keep going in the face of this activity? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think what keeps us going, and I think I 

could speak here for the thousands of folks that work at Planned 

Parenthood, many of whom deal with threats to their own personal 

safety, is it’s the patients, that’s what keeps you going. 

Ms. NORTON. But is there anything you could do to protect yourself, excuse me, to protect yourself when people come off the street? 

You presume they would be in good faith. Is there anything that 

an organization could even do to protect themselves against unethical activity of this kind? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we work—I mean, we work very hard to 

protect our patients, and they are our number one priority always, 

and so we have security. We take it very, very seriously. It’s a 

shame to think that there are people in this country who are so 

committed to ending women’s access to both birth control and safe 

and legal abortion that they will really resort to any means to try 

to entrap people, twist the truth, in order to reach their ends. 

But again, we believe, and why I’m here voluntarily today, is 

that the facts are on our side. We’re proud of the health care that 

we deliver every single year, despite the animosity by some, and 

we are grateful that the American people stand with Planned Parenthood, as I think as the Wall Street Journal showed last night. 

Ms. NORTON. Sixty-five percent. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you, Congresswoman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentlewoman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Mica, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. MICA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being with us. 

I guess we’re all products of our personal experience. We heard 

the chairman, we heard the ranking member, how their lives are 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
31 

affected. I guess when I was young I had a different opinion, but 

when my wife and I lost our first child your life and your philosophy change. And from that time, I tried to be a champion for the 

unborn. They don’t have advocates. A lot of groups, they get a lot 

of money advocating. But they don’t have a very good lobby. 

You are an advocate for abortion, and your organization provides 

a significant number of abortions. I think the staff told me there 

were about 300,000 abortions last year in the United States. Is 

that approximate? 

Ms. RICHARDS. About 300,000 at Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. MICA. At Planned Parenthood. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. MICA. What’s the total in the United States? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think it’s about a million. Actually, don’t hold 

me to that, though. I don’t have the numbers in front of me. 

Mr. MICA. So basically you provide about a third of the abortions. 

So you’re the leader—you would probably have to be the leading 

provider of abortion in the country, your organization? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know if that’s exactly true. I just only 

know what we do. 

Mr. MICA. You know, I have had belief of some exceptions, but 

there are many people that I represent myself who object to any 

public money going into abortions. I think the majority of Americans would oppose public Federal dollars going into abortion. 

Would you agree with that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t think the polling reflects that, but I 

guess—and it depends. I’m not familiar with your district. 

Mr. MICA. Again, I think if you ask people, I think they would, 

and that’s part of it. 

Now, the most recent controversy raised questions about public 

money and your organization. I looked at it, I was kind of stunned. 

It’s about 41 percent of your total money is Federal money. That’s 

not just a small amount, because if you had your—the money you 

get from different programs, grants, et cetera, it’s 41 percent, and 

I have had that figure confirmed. That’s a significant amount of 

money. 

Nobody—I don’t think most people have any problem with you 

spending the money on women’s health care. I’m a strong advocate 

for that. You have 650 clinics? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Roughly. There are new ones opening all the 

time. 

Mr. MICA. You told Mrs. Lummis that you don’t have one mammogram machine in one? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have never—mammograms have never—— 

Mr. MICA. So you don’t do that, but you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We do breast exams. 

Mr. MICA. You do. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Just like my own doctor does for—right. 

Mr. MICA. But your breast exams actually are down significantly. 

And I have got the numbers from your reports, from 830,312 exams 

in 2009 to 487,029 in 2013. And those are your statistics. So you 

are getting more money. You are not spending it there. 

Now, do all 650 of the clinics perform abortions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, sir. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
32 

Mr. MICA. How many? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Roughly half provide abortion services. 

Mr. MICA. So half of the clinics. Again, this is where when 41 

percent of the money is coming out of the public treasury, people 

become concerned. And there are people who their religion, their 

principles, they feel very strongly, as do I, that no public money 

should go into this. 

Mr. Cummings said we should do everything we should to put 

money into research. You’re not putting money into research.You 

know, you’re criticized for your salary, which is, you know, it’s a 

big organization. But then you look at where’s the money going? In 

Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, one employee got 

$459,000; in southern New England one employee got nearly 

$400,000, $398,000; another one, in Mira Monte, $387,000; another 

one, $377,000; another one, a-quarter-of-a-million dollars. There 

are dozens of employees in the quarter-of-a-million-dollar range. 

People want the money to go for research, people want the 

money to go for helping women with their health care, identifying 

the problem, or putting the money where it can do the most good. 

And again, we don’t—we have at least the perception of it not 

being the case when the chairman outlined travel, lavish parties, 

and expenses. And maybe you separate that money out, but I’m 

telling you, it does not look good. 

I yield back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I would love a chance to respond, but I guess that 

wasn’t really—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It was more of a comment than a question. 

We need to keep the pace here. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We’ll now recognize the gentleman from 

Virginia, Mr. Connolly, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the chair. 

Welcome, Ms. Richards. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you, Congressman. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I wish your mom were here today. She’d be handing out Texas boots to a lot of my colleagues. 

Ms. RICHARDS. She’s here in spirit. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Yeah, thank God. 

You know, I hope every American woman is watching today’s 

hearing because just the visuals, as well as the audios, tell you a 

lot. My colleagues like to say there is no war on women. Look at 

how you’ve been treated as a witness: Intimidation, talking over, 

interrupting, cutting off sentences, criticizing you because of your 

salary. How dare you? Who do you think you are? Making a professional salary as the head of a premier national organization and 

daring to actually make decisions as the head of that organization. 

Lord Almighty, what’s America coming to? 

The disrespect, the misogamy rampant here today tells us what 

is really going on here. This isn’t about some bogus video, the author of whom does not have the courage to appear here, nor would 

the majority call him because they know he’ll make a bad witness 

under oath. This is about a conservative philosophy that says we 

are constitutionalists. They hold it up. We believe in rugged indiVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:05 Jul 31, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26029.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
33 

vidualism and personal liberty. With one big carveout, though, 

there is an asterisk in that assertion, and that is except when it 

comes to women controlling their own bodies and making their own 

health decisions. 

You would never know that the Constitution, according to the 

Supreme Court, guarantees a right of choice. Hopefully, apparently, we’re going to erode that choice and that right by using insinuation and slander and half truths to besmirch a premier organization whose primary mission is to provide health services both 

to men and women, but primarily women. 

You know, this notion, one of my colleagues said, well, getting rid 

of Planned Parenthood will just hand over these functions to community health clinics and other nonprofits that can take up the 

slack. Now, if you were really committed to that principle, surely 

you would agree to the expansion of Medicaid as provided under 

the Affordable Care Act to, in my home State of Virginia, 400,000 

people who aren’t currently covered. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Make your job a lot easier, wouldn’t it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. A lot of women, a lot of families in this country 

need access to health care that are getting it. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Right. So if we really mean it, that’s what we do. 

But of course the very same people who are saying that vehemently 

oppose the expansion of Medicaid, which would be funded in the 

first 3 years by 100 percent of Federal dollars and thereafter 90 

percent, a good deal for any State, which might be why the Governor of Ohio, the Republican Governor of Ohio actually agreed 

with that and expanded it. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s right. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Is there anything else you want to add, uninterrupted, with some sense of respect, Ms. Richards? Let me at least 

provide that to you. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, thank you, Congressman. And I did want to 

respond to some of what’s been said. We are a healthcare provider 

to 2.7 million people every year. They come to us by choice. And 

so when I think about what’s really at stake here, particularly for 

folks who think about ending access to Planned Parenthood, I 

think about those folks. 

Last year, we provided 3.5 million birth control services in this 

country; 4.4 million STD testing and treatments; 378,000 Pap tests; 

and almost half a million breast exams; and more than a million 

pregnancy tests. I think it’s interesting, one of the things we do at 

Planned Parenthood is we work to the highest level, most current 

level of health care for women. And so it’s interesting, we are being 

criticized for the decline in Pap smears, but in fact that’s because 

we actually have adopted the recent—the best medicine, which is 

that not every woman needs a Pap smear every year. 

To me that’s what we’re about, is making sure that every woman 

in this country, regardless of where she lives, regardless of her income, her immigration status, whether she is insured, can get access to health care. That’s what we do at Planned Parenthood and 

we’re proud to do it. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
34 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And there’s other thing, and that’s called respect. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

I now recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan, for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Ms. Richards, this is my 27th year in Congress. I 

can assure you, I have seen many male witnesses treated much 

tougher than you have been treated here today. And also, surely, 

you don’t expect us—I can assure you, I’m not going to be tough 

on you, but surely, you don’t expect us to be easier on you because 

you’re a woman? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Absolutely not. That’s not how my mama raised 

me. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. 

Let me ask you this. You say in your testimony that a lot of 

women wouldn’t have access to certain types of health care were 

it not for Planned Parenthood. Do you know that the Department 

of Health and Human Services says there are 9,727 healthcare 

service delivery sites, there are 4,082 rural health clinics, 1,200 

federally funded qualified health centers that also operate 9,000 

other sites—over 9,000? Do you know about that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Uh-huh. 

Mr. DUNCAN. And you also know that there are over 2,000 pregnancy health centers, over 80 percent of which receive no Federal 

funds at all. And that doesn’t even count the many hundreds of 

thousands of private doctors, nurses, and healthcare delivery services, walk-in clinics, and so forth. Have you taken all of that into 

consideration? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Certainly. I mean, what I can speak to is what 

I know about is the patients that choose—again, voluntarily—to 

come to us. I think one of the interesting things is that for nationally a third of the women who access family planning services 

through a safety net provider, a third of the women get that from 

Planned Parenthood, even though—even though we are only—— 

Mr. DUNCAN. But my point is there’s many, many thousands of 

other alternative healthcare providers. 

Let me ask you this. According to our reports, there are 2.3 million private charitable organizations. Almost all of them receive no 

Federal funds. But do you know how many receive 41 percent of 

their funding from the taxpayers? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know how many see as many patients as 

we do. We see 2.7 million patients a year. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, I’m saying, do you know of any other private 

charitable organizations that are receiving 41 percent from the government or $528 million from the taxpayers? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, again, I think the comparison, the fair comparison would be, who is seeing 2.7 million patients? Because as 

I said earlier, we don’t get a big check from the Federal Government. We actually are reimbursed for services delivered, for birth 

control, for STD testing and treatment, for well-woman visits. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, I can tell you that almost every one of those 

2.3 million charitable organizations would, I’m sure, if given the 

opportunity, would tell us that the government—taxpayers benefit 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
35 

from what they’re doing also. And just to give you an example, the 

national Boys & Girls Clubs in their last annual report said they 

received $26 million from the Federal Government compared to 

your $528 million. It seems a little bit lopsided to me. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think the cost of providing health care to 

2.7 million people, and I very much respect the Boys & Girls Club, 

but we are actually just—we work like hospitals and other 

healthcare providers and being reimbursed for—directly for services that we provide. Again, I think it’s—the comparison is a little 

apples and oranges. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Let me ask you this. Do you think it’s right in a 

free country to force people to contribute to your organization? Because that’s what you are doing, taking taxpayer money from people that are totally opposed to what you’re doing. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We provide health care under the Medicaid program just like every other hospital and healthcare provider that 

sees Medicaid patients. And I think one of the things that’s important to understand is in many areas there aren’t new doctors or 

healthcare providers that will see Medicaid patients. So particularly when you are talking about OB–GYN services, it’s not always 

easy for women, and particularly in the southern United States, to 

find someone who will actually provide them a well-woman visit, 

birth control services. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Let me ask you this because my time is running 

out. But I know you apologized for the discussion and the tone and 

maybe the laughter—I don’t know whether you apologized for the 

laughter or not on the videos. But I’m not clear on this: Do you defend the sale of baby body parts? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. And I think that is really a total 

mischaracterization. Fetal tissue research, which as I mentioned 

was started, the whole commission that legalized and created the 

structure under fetal tissue research was started under the Reagan 

administration. And it is—actually what it does is facilitates fetal 

tissue donation. And that is actually, as I said, fewer than 1 percent of our health centers do any—facilitate fetal tissue donation 

for the patient. But fetal tissue research—— 

Mr. DUNCAN. My time has run out. I just want to say this. It 

seems to me that the apology you offered was like what some criminals do. They’re not really sorry for what they’ve done, they’re 

sorry they got caught. And it seems to me that your apology is 

more because you got caught on these videos. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I respectfully disagree. 

Mr. JORDAN. [Presiding.] I thank the gentleman. 

The gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Duckworth, is recognized. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, thank you for being here and testifying today. I’m 

troubled by the ongoing attacks to defund Planned Parenthood, an 

organization that provides such extensive preventative healthcare 

services to millions of women. 

And in fact, I ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a 

letter from 92 organizations that work closely with Planned Parenthood talking about all of the great, high-quality health care 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
36 

Planned Parenthood provides to women and men across the country. 

Mr. JORDAN. Without objection, so ordered. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

I, myself, have received services from Planned Parenthood. In 

fact, I, like many young men and women in this country, when I 

was in my early 20s and first in college, I came from a very poor 

family and I wasn’t really able to afford college. And, in fact, I went 

to college based on student loans and Pell grants and two jobs, one 

of which was as a waitress. I couldn’t get that waitressing job without getting a health exam, and I couldn’t afford to go to a doctor. 

And the job was there. You can start Friday if you come in with 

a valid health exam. Go to your local Planned Parenthood. They 

will do it for you today and you can start work in 2 days. It was 

a lifesaver. 

And so I remember what it was like to be a young person, needing the health care and being able to trust that I could go to my 

local Planned Parenthood to get all the care that I needed. So 

thank you to the organization for providing those services for me 

when I was in need. 

I want to talk a little bit about what you do across the country 

and focus a little bit, as an example, on my home State of Illinois. 

I think it is a critical point that 96 percent of the services that 

Planned Parenthood, according to your most recent annual report, 

are for preventative and screening services. In fact, in Illinois for 

2015, and I think—tell me if these numbers sound accurate to 

you—nearly 60 percent patients were served over the course of approximately 110,000 visits in Illinois. Nearly 50,000 visits were for 

contraceptive services and over 34,000 visits were for STD testing 

and treatment; 7,000 visits were for cancer screenings. Does that 

sound about right to you, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That does. That does, thank you. Yes, Congresswoman. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

I would like to address an issue that started very early on in this 

hearing, which was this implication that by allowing Medicare and 

Medicaid to reimburse Planned Parenthood we are shifting money 

away that could be better used for military defense and for our 

service men and women. And as a military woman who just retired 

after 23 years of service, I would like to ask you to talk a little bit 

about the services that Planned Parenthood has provided to military men and women and their families for the past several decades, and also include the women of the Peace Corps. 

You know, I think it is especially important to note that the very 

women who are willing to lay down their lives to defend the Constitution of this great Nation were denied services under the Hyde 

Amendment for abortion services, especially as a result of rape or 

incest. And especially, you know, this is tragic in light of the many 

tens of thousands of women who are victims of military sexual 

trauma every single year. So can you go over what you have done 

for military men and women and Peace Corps volunteers for the 

past many decades? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, thank you. And I’m glad we were able to 

provide you health care when you needed it. I know for many 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
37 

young women, I too, my first real doctor visit was at a Planned 

Parenthood when I had gone away from Texas. So I am grateful 

as well to the organization. 

We do serve everyone, and that is really—our mantra is ‘‘Care. 

No matter what.’’ We believe it’s so important that no matter what 

walk of life someone comes from, whether they’re insured, whether 

they’re in the military, that they get services. In fact, I remember 

the last time that this House of Representatives went through a 

similar exercise, I remember hearing from a woman in North Carolina, who said, you know, she wrote in, she said: I don’t know that 

they know that us military wives go to Planned Parenthood when 

the doctor on base can’t see us. 

And so I do know that we serve military families all over this 

country, and we’re proud to do so. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Can you talk a little bit about Senator 

Murray’s bipartisan legislation to allow—Women Veterans and 

Family Health Services Act—which would allow us access to IVF 

treatment, many of us for infertility issues caused by our military 

service, being withdrawn as a result of the attacks on Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m not familiar with all the details of her 

bill, but I know Senator Murray has been a strong advocate for addressing—ensuring that women in the military get the same types 

of services that women do here in the States. And I think we are 

highly supportive of that. It is incredibly important to me that 

women—we equalize women’s access to health care, both globally 

and in the U.S. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you very much, Ms. Richards. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. [Presiding.] I thank the gentlewoman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALBERG. I thank the chairman. 

And I thank the witness for being here. And I want you to note 

I’m wearing a pink tie in solidarity with women’s health issues 

today. My wife, my daughter-in-law, my daughter, my two granddaughters—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congratulations. 

Mr. WALBERG. —are extremely important to me. 

Just to go back to some of the statements on the videos, and I’m 

not going to spend time there, but Planned Parenthood commissioned a report by Fusion GPS examining the authenticity of the 

videos. The conclusion of that report says the analysis did not reveal widespread evidence of quote, ‘‘substantive video manipulation,’’ and it, quote, ‘‘shows no evidence of audio manipulation.’’ 

Full versions of the videos are available on the Center for Medical 

Progress Web site and the CMP YouTube channel showing that the 

only parts that have been edited out are, one, bathroom breaks, 

and, two, breaks where no conversations took place. 

I just want that stated for the record, Mr. Chairman, as we have 

a lot of controversy about the videos. And yet, the eyes show it, but 

ears even more so hear what was said. 

Let me go—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Could I address that? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
38 

Mr. WALBERG. Very quickly. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, I understand that. 

Mr. WALBERG. Because I want to go on to more crucial issues. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I do think it’s important that we at Planned 

Parenthood asked, I think even perhaps prior to this committee, 

that all of the original source footage be released, and that’s actually—that has still not happened. Because, again, we want to 

know—we want all of it out there. 

Mr. WALBERG. Well, we want to know too, and I think that would 

be an opportunity. 

Ms. RICHARDS. So I think we can agree on that. 

Mr. WALBERG. But what we have seen so far, the ears have 

heard what was said. 

Also, I would address the unnecessary attacks coming from some 

of the other side, especially on men taking an interest in the lives 

of people most important in our lives. If men in this society aren’t 

allowed to stand and defend the women and children we love, what 

has our country fallen to? 

It’s a shame we are even having this type of hearing today when 

we have been brought into a frenzy and a concern about what happens to our babies, our most defenseless. I just held in my arms 

my brand-new granddaughter 3 weeks ago in an African country 

where she was born. I thank God for that life, that unique special 

life. And I told my son-in-law on the way home, I said: It’s amazing, Prince, that as we drive home here today, having never met 

this little girl before, I would give my life for her. I love her. She 

is unique and special. 

That’s why we have this hearing today. We want to get to the 

truth. We want to make sure women’s healthcare issues are dealt 

with, and dealt with appropriately. 

In that same country, meeting with the President of the country 

the next day, and the Speaker of Parliament, who is a female, they 

pleaded with me as a Member of Congress to stop hurting their 

women and families and children, trying to change their culture 

with organizations like our State Department, USAID, and 

Planned Parenthood. 

Let me ask some questions here, and I take this information 

from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, your Web site, 

and I take it from Medicare Benefit Policy Manual. It says that 

both federally qualified healthcare centers, 13,000 of them in this 

listing, and Planned Parenthood centers provide pelvic exams, Pap, 

HPV testing, STD testing, manual breast exams, birth control. 

Both entities provide that. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know what all of the entirety of what all 

FQHCs provide, but I know that we provide all of that. 

Mr. WALBERG. But you provide all that I just mentioned? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes. 

Mr. WALBERG. But emergency first responder care, mammograms, immunizations, diabetes and glaucoma screenings, cholesterol screenings, pediatric eye, ear, dental screenings, well-child 

services, radiological services, cardiovascular blood test, bone mass 

measurement, nurse on staff, all of those, according to your Web 

site, you don’t provide. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
39 

Ms. RICHARDS. We provide in some places, but it’s not a core 

service, so it depends on the State. 

Mr. WALBERG. It’s not a promised service. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It depends on the State. 

Mr. WALBERG. According to the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, 

the federally qualified healthcare centers provide those services. 

Now, if we’re talking about care for women, I would suggest that 

the care is there in 13,000 without the controversy of the abortions, 

the fetal manipulation, and potential use of body parts in the 

wrong way. 

And I think for the record, if we’re talking about women’s health 

care, the issue of where we find it, it’s found in 13,000-plus centers 

available to women, and Medicaid isn’t dealing with it. And oh, by 

the way, your opening statement indicated great problems with 

Medicaid, and ObamaCare is supposed to take care of that. 

I hear my time has ended, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I would be happy to—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman yields back. 

I now recognize the gentlewoman from Michigan, Mrs. Lawrence, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Thank you. 

There’s a couple of things. It is very troubling to sit here as a 

woman and to hear some questions that obviously are insensitive. 

One, the continual question of why don’t you provide the x-rays for 

a mammogram where every woman here knows you have a primary doctor, and that doctor examines you, and if there is a lump, 

you are referred to a specialist. So I wish those who would sit here 

to ask those questions would actually have the sensitivity to understand what a woman goes through with her health care. That 

would allow us to ask more pertinent questions. 

Secondly, it is exhausting to keep hearing about Federal dollars 

being spent on abortion when repeatedly the facts state—and it’s 

not a controversy, read the facts, do your research before you ask 

these exhausting, sometimes, I feel, insulting questions—we cannot 

use Federal dollars for abortion. 

This is not a lump-sum budget item that we give to Planned Parenthood. It is reimbursement. How many times does that have to 

be repeated for this to become an embraced fact? If there were no 

citizens of the United States going to Planned Parenthood to receive these medical approved services, that we approve as a Congress, there would be no reimbursement going to Planned Parenthood. They would not receive any funds. 

I just, for the life of me, sitting here today, I know my colleagues 

are more intelligent than this, and it is exhausting to hear just a 

philosophy of attack to just use information that is totally incorrect, as if I keep saying it, some kind of way it becomes factual. 

My question. Ms. Richards, there seems to be this continuous 

thought that if Planned Parenthood went away, that there would 

be these other healthcare services for a million of women because 

you went away. There is a suggestion that all of these community 

health centers would just step in and fill up. Sara Rosenbaum, a 

professor of health and law and policy at George Washington, has 

worked with the community health centers for years. And I quote, 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
40 

‘‘A claim that community health centers readily can absorb the loss 

of Planned Parenthood is a gross misrepresentation.’’ 

I would ask you, Ms. Richards, can, in your experience in health 

care, the perception that if you went away, it would be totally absorbed, can you please respond to that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thanks, Congresswoman. Yes, I think this is a 

really important point, and I know there has been a lot of discussion. 

First, just for the record, we see 2.7 million patients a year; 78 

percent of them are at 150 percent of poverty or below. So these 

are a group of women and men and young people who are often uninsured and certainly have less access to care. 

I know there have been a lot of reports that have come out since 

Congress has suggested eliminating access to Planned Parenthood 

for patients. I know the CBO own study, the Congressional Budget 

Office, estimated that 390,000 women would lose care next year if 

women could no longer go to Planned Parenthood. 

And I think to some of the questions that have been raised, it’s 

really important for folks to understand, just as you talked about 

how women actually get breast exams and breast care in this country, in some areas we are the only safety net family planning provider. And that is the care for most women, and particularly young 

women, the care that they need is family planning, it’s access to 

their cancer screenings, and their well-woman visits. In many 

areas there are long waits. Sixty percent of our clinics will see folks 

the same day. In some areas they won’t take any more Medicaid 

patients, and Planned Parenthood is the only entity. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. And it is true that the Medicare and the targeted audience or group that use Planned Parenthood are often 

those who are most at risk. African American, minority women die 

at a higher level than any other population when it comes to breast 

cancer, when it comes to actually dying from having pelvic or cervical cancer. So we are actually giving opportunities. 

I want to interject or ask, Mr. Chairman, unanimous consent, to 

enter a letter into the record from Latino organizations that stated 

that they know for a fact in their communities the community 

health centers could not absorb this. 

And I just want to close because I only have a few seconds—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Without objection, so ordered. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. But the gentlewoman’s time has expired. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

We will now recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Gosar. 

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield my time to the gentlewoman 

from Utah, Mrs. Love. 

Mrs. LOVE. Thank you. 

I’m right here. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Mrs. LOVE. First of all, I want to say thank you for coming and 

answering questions. I want to be very clear that there are no 

gotcha questions here. I just want to be able to get as much information as possible. I’m not here to try and change your mind or 

change the minds of our colleagues. I’m just trying to get as much 

information out to the public as we possibly can because some of 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
41 

these funds are their taxpayer dollars, and I think that they deserve to have some answers. 

First of all, Ms. Richards, in the annual report, Planned Parenthood’s annual report, says that you are providing over 489,000 

breast cancer screenings. And you have stated that none of your 

clinics actually have the mammogram machines. How many of your 

affiliates have those mammogram machines? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, our health centers are part of our affiliates. 

We have more than 650 health centers. So affiliate is simply the 

corporate structure for those health centers. 

Mrs. LOVE. And how many of those have mammogram machines? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The affiliate isn’t a health center. I said, I think 

I spoke earlier, we do not have mammogram machines at our 

health centers and we have never stated that we did. Because as 

was mentioned earlier, for women who go for a breast exam, just 

as I go for my annual, you get a breast exam, and if you need a 

mammogram you’re referred to a radiological clinic, and that’s 

what we do at Planned Parenthood every day. 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay, so you refer them to radiological clinics. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Or whatever—we have partnerships with the 

Komen Foundation. And a lot of different ways—— 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. There are a lot of different ways in which we 

refer for mammograms. 

Mrs. LOVE. That’s what I want to know. 

Okay. So how much does Planned Parenthood make from cancer 

screenings? Do you know how much you make? 

Ms. RICHARDS. How much we make? 

Mrs. LOVE. Yes, the revenues. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, for Federal—for Federal—so just talking the 

Federal funding, we don’t make money off of cancer screenings. 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay. That’s great. How much—well, you don’t get 

anything from mammograms either. How much is made from abortions? What’s the revenue that comes in from abortions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So let me just—you’re going to have to bear with 

me a minute so I can be responsive. 

Mrs. LOVE. I only have a little bit of time, so if you could respond 

as quickly as possible. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I will. There’s 59—— 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. There are 59 affiliates. Each of them are completely different, right, they all run their own operation. And I 

can’t tell you—I think this question was raised earlier—I can’t tell 

you—— 

Mrs. LOVE. You can’t tell me how much you actually make from 

abortions. You can’t give that number. Okay—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. The national office—just also so you know, we do 

not provide health services at the national office. We have provided 

information for all 59 affiliates, their annuals, their audited financial statements. 

Mrs. LOVE. I wasn’t even asking about the affiliates. I’m just asking about—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, that’s where health services are provided, so 

I think that’s—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
42 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay. Okay. So you don’t—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —that’s relevant to your question. 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay, but you don’t have those numbers. All you’re 

saying is that the healthcare affiliates have these numbers and you 

don’t have them, so you don’t know. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Certainly not—— 

Mrs. LOVE. So for the year ending June 30, 2014, according to 

Planned Parenthood reports, $127.1 million in revenue over expenses. From 2005 to 2013 Planned Parenthood reported a 53 percent reduction in cancer screenings and preventive services and 42 

percent reduction in breast exams and breast care, while abortions 

have increased 24 percent. 

Can you understand a little bit of the hesitancy in trying to figure out why those numbers have gone down where abortions have 

actually gone up? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay, so we’re talking about two different—I’m 

trying to—so we don’t mix apples and oranges here. So Federal 

funding pays—Medicaid funding and Title X pays for very specific 

preventive care services, as we’ve discussed. And Federal funding 

does not pay for abortion except for very limited circumstances. 

Mrs. LOVE. So what I’m trying to say is why would it be so offensive if we actually took funding and put it into clinics that actually 

provide—where those numbers are actually increasing providing 

healthcare exams, providing mammograms—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We’re providing—— 

Mrs. LOVE. —that actually have those? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Medicaid reimbursements, if they are going 

up, if the numbers are going up, that’s because more services are 

being provided. And as you know, many women now, because of the 

Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion, there are more patients on Medicaid that are coming to us for health care. 

So that’s—all the reimbursements are directly related to 

healthcare delivery services. We work—Planned Parenthood—you 

were not here earlier—Planned Parenthood is just like any other 

hospital or healthcare provider—— 

Mrs. LOVE. Okay. So—but you have also made it—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —that provides services to Medicaid patients. 

Mrs. LOVE. —you’ve also made it very clear that if Planned Parenthood wasn’t around, this would be very difficult for low-income 

families. So what is the responsibility of hospitals and other clinics 

that, you know, that you actually—that people can actually go to? 

I mean—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, many of them—— 

Mrs. LOVE. —you can’t say that Planned Parenthood is the only 

place that’s available. 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, but obviously it’s a place that 2.7 million patients choose voluntarily to come to every year. And I think what’s 

important is that in a lot of areas of the country they won’t take 

more Medicaid patients. 

Mrs. LOVE. But what is our job here? It’s to provide as many options as possible. So all I’m saying is that—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I would agree. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
43 

Mrs. LOVE. —there’s no reason why we can’t provide those options elsewhere, where people can have their choice as to where 

they go. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Exactly. Congresswoman, I think actually this 

may be an area where you and I agree. 

Mrs. LOVE. My time is up, but, Mr. Chairman, I would—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I would like a chance to answer this. 

Mrs. LOVE. You did actually. You answered my questions. 

Mr. Chairman, if you could help in getting some of the information about how much, the numbers that I have asked for, that 

would be really helpful. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I appreciate it. 

The gentleman from Arizona who yielded to you, his time has expired. 

I would ask unanimous consent to take—there are four pages 

from the annual reports, and we’ll have the documentation on the 

reduction in the breast exams and breast care. And so without objection, I’d like to enter that into the record. 

No objection, so ordered. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Lieu, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LIEU. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for your testimony and the gracefulness in which you have answered the questions today. I want to 

also thank you for running an organization that has helped millions of women and men across America. And on behalf of the majority of women and men in this great Nation, I want to say thank 

you. 

And having sat here for the last hour-and-a-half I feel like I’m 

in some sort of bizarre alternate universe. I think it’s crazy we’re 

having this hearing based on heavily edited videos and misleading 

videos that actually show the exact opposite of what was happening. And what was happening was that Planned Parenthood 

was following the law. 

I think it is also crazy that we’re here when we have fetal tissue 

research that is not only entirely legal, but has bipartisan support. 

And I think it’s insane that in my district now, because of these 

misleading videos, women have in some cases had to go through 

two sets of bomb-proof doors just to access health care. 

And I thank you for your courage, and I note the cowardliness 

of the maker of these videos who was too scared to come before to 

us testify. 

So let’s just come back to reality for a few minutes. 

Mr. LIEU. Abortion is legal in the United States of America. Isn’t 

that correct, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It is correct. 

Mr. LIEU. And we don’t live in a theocracy. The law of the land 

is not the Old Testament or the New Testament or the Koran or 

the Torah. The law of the land is the Constitution of the United 

States. Isn’t that correct, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. LIEU. And abortion is a constitutional right. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
44 

Mr. LIEU. And Planned Parenthood allows women to access that 

constitutional right. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, we do. 

Mr. LIEU. And none of that gets any Federal funding. Isn’t that 

correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct, except in the very limited circumstances allowed by Federal law. 

Mr. LIEU. Thank you. 

Now, there are multiple medical clinics across America that also 

provide abortion services, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry. Could you repeat the—— 

Mr. LIEU. There are multiple medical clinics—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And hospitals. 

Mr. LIEU. —and hospitals across America that provide abortion 

services, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. LIEU. And they also provide services that have Medicaid reimbursement. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe that’s correct, yes. 

Mr. LIEU. And no one is saying, let’s shut down medical clinics 

and hospitals because they also happen to provide abortion services. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t think that’s been proposed. 

Mr. LIEU. In fact, they’re going right after Planned Parenthood, 

even though you do the same thing as many of these medical clinics, because you actually, like any organization, have separate line 

items. That’s not a new or novel concept, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. LIEU. Okay. 

So let’s talk about fetal tissue research. It has made enormous, 

lifesaving changes for millions of Americans and people across the 

world. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s right. 

Mr. LIEU. In fact, fetal tissue research has resulted directly in 

the development of the polio vaccine, vaccines for hepatitis A, rubella, chickenpox, shingles, and rabies. 

Anyone in America that has had a family member or themselves 

been affected by multiple sclerosis, ALS, and other central nervous 

system diseases, you can thank fetal tissue research for making advancements in that field. 

If anyone has been affected by age-related macular degeneration, 

by all sorts of cancer, by diabetes, by cardiovascular disease, by immune system issues, and by glaucoma, you can thank fetal tissue 

research for making advancements in those areas. 

It is crazy that we’re here because the other side wants to shut 

down government because Planned Parenthood was following the 

law because fetal tissue research is something that’s helping lots 

of people, and now we want to shut down government because we 

want to defund all of that. That doesn’t make any sense to me. 

And let me, sort of, conclude now by asking you to respond to, 

sort of, the question about why there has been a reduction in cancer screenings. Isn’t it true, it’s because guidelines have changed? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
45 

Mr. LIEU. They said, let’s do less mammograms. And then, in 

terms of Medicaid reimbursements, guidelines changed there too. 

About pap smears, let’s do lots of those, too. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. And we always follow the best 

science and the best medicine at Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. LIEU. And then let me read a quick letter from one of my 

constituents who saw that Planned Parenthood might get 

defunded. 

She said that she grew up in a small desert town, made some 

poor choices, ditched school at age 15, starting having sex. And she 

didn’t want to end up pregnant like a lot of young girls in my town, 

so she went to the one place that she knew would help her, 

Planned Parenthood. They made her feel comfortable. They gave 

her an exam, gave her birth control pills. They told her that she 

had an STD, would need to take antibiotics. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yep. 

Mr. LIEU. She says, without that, the STD could’ve made me permanently infertile. But because of what Planned Parenthood did, 

she corrected herself, graduated with straight A’s, and is now a 

medical doctor. And she thanks Planned Parenthood for helping 

her and her family. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m so pleased to hear that. Thanks for sharing 

that. 

Mr. LIEU. I yield back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

But I would also admonish all members on both sides, the prescription of motivation is not something we generally allow members to push on other members. 

I will tell you, in response to what the gentleman said, the producer of these videos was not invited to this hearing. And part of 

the reason we didn’t do that is we think—I think I did the responsible thing—and you’ve heard Mr. Cummings in support of this— 

is I issued a subpoena to get all the videos. And the only reason 

that they have not been produced is that there’s a temporary restraining order by a court in California. 

I would love to have the videos. But if we’re going to ferret out 

what the accusation is, you have to see all the videos. And that’s 

what we’re trying to do. But there was never a suggestion that this 

gentleman, Mr. Daleiden, was anything but cooperative. He simply 

was not invited here, because without the videos we can’t have a 

good discussion about that. 

Mr. LIEU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the clarification. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, let me just ask you this. With 

this order coming out of California, are we going to continue to try 

to get all of the videos? 

You know, I just—I see how we have been aggressive with regard 

to getting witnesses and trying to get documents. And this is such 

a very important issue. And, as I’ve said to you privately, I think, 

that what I’m concerned about is the integrity of the process no 

matter what, no matter where people end up on either end. At 

least I want—if these videos are going to be even partially the 

foundation of what we’re doing, I think we need to have all of 

them. And we need to pursue them just like we would pursue other 

items and information that we need. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
46 

And I would just ask the chairman, are we going to continue to 

try to pursue that? I mean—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Absolutely. That’s what we did, without the 

support—— 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And will continue to do. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We will continue to do it. That’s what we 

did without the support of the minority, in this case. We will continue to do that. But for this temporary restraining order, I think 

we would actually have had them by the time that we got here, but 

we did not. 

We will continue to pursue them. We’re working closely with 

House legal counsel, who is now representing us, to try to make 

that case to that court and to that client, where there is a legitimate conflict. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Would the gentleman yield just for 30 seconds? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Let me make it very, very clear that—you’ve now 

said it two or three times, and I want to make it clear. We will join 

you in a subpoena to get every single tape, period—no ands, no ifs, 

or buts—period. And I don’t know where that’s coming from, but, 

as the ranking member of this committee, I’m letting you know 

that, all right? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I appreciate that. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. All right. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. Appreciate the clarification. 

Now we’ll recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. 

DesJarlais, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I would like to yield to the gentleman from Arizona, Dr. 

Gosar. 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Cummings, you made a comment earlier that I want to address. The New York Times reported that the EPA unleashed a 

major lobbying campaign to rally comments in support for its new 

‘‘waters of the U.S.’’ regulation. You earlier went off an Lockheed 

Martin in regards to that application. I have to tell you, the EPA 

also disregarded the anti-lobbying act and broke the law. 

If you actually believe in what you were talking and preaching 

about, I’d hope that you would cosponsor my removal of Ms. Gina 

McCarthy as the EPA Administrator. 

Now back to those processes in here. 

Ms. Richards—I’m up here. You’re a CEO, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GOSAR. So you do understand market penetration, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I mean, I’m a nonprofit CEO, so—— 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, no, but, I mean, you look at those numbers. I 

mean, all CEOs are looking at, you know, how to expand and profit. I mean, you’re obviously—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We don’t profit, so I don’t look at how—I don’t actually look at how to profit. But we do, obviously, look how to expand into areas particularly where there’s unmet need. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. I like that. So your market penetration in Arizona is different than your market penetration in New York State, 

would you say? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
47 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sure it is. 

Mr. GOSAR. Yeah. You know, there’s three in Arizona, and there’s 

quite a few more in New York. And there’s a pretty good web of 

preventative services. 

So I kind of want to go back. In your annual report, the report 

said—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually—— 

Mr. GOSAR. —$117.63 million in excess revenues for the fiscal 

year of 2013–2014. That number has jumped $18.5 million from its 

report in 2009–2010. 

I’d like you to tell me how you got the growth of those funds, why 

we’re seeing such a growth in those—that profit. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we—it’s not profit. So let me just be really 

clear just in terms of terminology. It’s not profit. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually, it’s revenue that we use for services. So 

one example—— 

Mr. GOSAR. So would we agree that it’s excesses of revenue over 

expenses? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s—— 

Mr. GOSAR. So how do you explain that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Right. 

Mr. GOSAR. I want you to explain that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s from fundraising. That’s what I spend a lot 

of my time doing. 

And so there are areas of the country where we want to expand, 

to your question about if you only have one health center in a State 

and you think that there is more need. So we are involved currently in raising money and spending it. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. I think—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We just opened a new health center in—— 

Mr. GOSAR. —you gave me a great answer. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I could give you several examples. 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, you fundraise. And I think that—so—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. But we fundraise specifically to expand services. 

Mr. GOSAR. I understand that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yeah. 

Mr. GOSAR. I understand that. I understand that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. GOSAR. So what are you looking to report in 2014? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry, what’s that? 

Mr. GOSAR. So what’s that number in 2014? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have all the—I mean, we’ve provided—— 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. So I thought—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —I’m sorry—thousands of pages of documents. 

Mr. GOSAR. It’s actually going up. It’s actually going up to $127 

million in regards to—so there’s an escalating aspect. So you’re a 

pretty good CEO. So you’re looking at excess revenues over expenses. So that’s pretty good. 

I’m having trouble in all this, in regards to the fundraising application, particularly when I look at these numbers: the 80-percent 

reduction in prenatal care services, the 57-percent reduction in canVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:05 Jul 31, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26029.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
48 

cer screenings preventative services, the 45-percent reduction in 

breast exams, on and on and on and on. 

And, by the way, I was a dentist, so I do understand Medicaid 

reimbursement rates. They don’t pay, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. So—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, it depends on the State. 

Mr. GOSAR. You’re lucky—you’re lucky if you get reimbursed 

your costs. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, and, actually, I would say, since you do understand Medicaid, as you know, it varies in all 50 States. And so 

we do raise money over expenses in order to supplement the cost 

of—— 

Mr. GOSAR. I understand. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —Medicaid services. 

Mr. GOSAR. So let me ask you a question. And with a mediator, 

what have you been able to facilitate for a lump cost for the price 

of contraceptives? Is there a unit price that you’ve been able to 

lower down, to get a price fixed? Can you give me that number? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t—no, I actually don’t. And I don’t—— 

Mr. GOSAR. It’s been reported—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t do that. 

Mr. GOSAR. It’s been reported by those numbers that it’s about $3 that you’re paying for the average contraceptive. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually, I really—I don’t want to—— 

Mr. GOSAR. So—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s very much all over the map, as you know, and 

it depends on what—— 

Mr. GOSAR. On the average. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s not—I really—— 

Mr. GOSAR. Well—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually, I disagree with you. I don’t think that 

fact is correct. 

Mr. GOSAR. —I mean, this is a very salient point, because this 

is a profit center. Because what ends up happening, you’re reimbursed by the Federal Government in Medicaid at $35, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s—— 

Mr. GOSAR. So if we’re truly looking at mediation and spreading 

the wealth of the pharmaceuticals, when we get a break, we ought 

to pass it on. Don’t you agree? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, as you know—— 

Mr. GOSAR. No. Don’t you agree? Because that facilitates more 

services, does it not, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Our entire focus is on serving as many patients 

as we can, and so your example—— 

Mr. GOSAR. That is not exactly true, because what you’ve done 

now, and the reason I can show this is, is you’ve narrowed the 

focus. What we end up having is, there’s very few primary care 

docs out there because they can’t afford to stay in practice. So what 

you’ve done is narrowed the scope of the practice, so where there’s 

profit centers—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I—— 

Mr. GOSAR. No? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I disagree. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
49 

Mr. GOSAR. This is my time. This is my time, so don’t interrupt 

it. 

And so, from that standpoint, what you’ve done is narrow that 

focus so that you’re profiting off death. Because the numbers— 

where you’re making that profit center is actually off abortions. 

And that’s appalling to me. 

So thank you very much. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentlewoman from New Jersey, Ms. Watson Coleman, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for enduring—enduring what I consider to be a very offensive approach on the part of my colleagues 

on the other side of the aisle as they’ve badgered you with questions, as they’ve used their rhetoric to suggest in a questionable 

way that they’re seeking information and at the same time not giving you a chance to answer the questions. 

I’m actually a little confused of why we’re here. Are we here because of these videos and there’s a questionability about Planned 

Parenthood doing something that’s illegal as it related to the collection of fetal tissue? Are we here simply because the ideological 

right wing of this Republican Conference here in Congress, the dysfunction has manifested simply so anti-woman’s-right-to-choose 

that they would bring you here for a fourth hearing? Or are we 

here because somebody believes that Planned Parenthood doesn’t 

need Federal reimbursement for the health care that it gives? 

For whatever reason, for whatever one of those reasons, those 

are specious reasons. And for my colleagues on the other side of the 

aisle to act like they don’t understand and to suggest that they’re 

ill-informed, if they are ill-informed, it’s because they choose to be. 

I couldn’t hardly get into this room today, with all of the people 

on the outside in the hallways that were trying to get in here to 

be supportive of Planned Parenthood, because we know and recognize the impact that Planned Parenthood has had on healthy 

lives—not just women’s lives but including men’s lives. 

We know in New Jersey, in my State, where this Governor, Chris 

Christie, spent so much of his leverage defunding Planned Parenthood and then suggesting that the federally qualified healthcare 

centers would be able to pick up the slack, they came in and testified that they couldn’t possibly accommodate all of the deficiencies 

that would occur without Planned Parenthood. We know that—the 

work that you do. 

So I just want to do a couple things, and I want to do them 

quickly. 

I want to acknowledge all the young women and men in the overflow room. 

I want to talk to you a little about Mr. ‘‘Daleiden’’ or ‘‘Daleiden’’ 

or whatever his name is, but the mystery man who’s spent so much 

of his life trying to discredit Planned Parenthood. 

You all had a forensic report done—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. —on those videos. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
50 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. And that forensic report revealed that 

there were so many discrepancies, that there were so many inaccuracies, and that it would be impossible to characterize the extent 

to which CMP’s undisclosed edits and cuts distort the meaning of 

the encounters the videos purport to document. However, the manipulation of the videos does not mean they have no evidentiary 

value in legal context and cannot be relied upon. 

I want to put that report into the record. And I am asking unanimous consent to accept this forensic report. Because somewhere 

along the line, we ought to be getting part of the other story. 

Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Before I rule on that, I’d place a temporary 

objection in place. Let me look at the report prior to entering it into 

the record. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Well, then, I guess I should also register 

my temporary objection to the fact that we have one witness here 

and we haven’t even tried to get Mr. Daleiden here or anyone else 

who would be—who we would be able to question with regard to 

the accuracy of all the allegations that we are moving on right now. 

And I also want to say, before I give you an opportunity to answer any question that was left out there in the universe hovering 

over us so that you can put things that you think that are on— 

on the record, that this is another very poor illustration of our deflecting our attention away from the work that the people have 

elected us to do. 

We need to have an Export-Import Bank that creates jobs. We 

need to have an infrastructure program that creates jobs. We need 

to be reauthorizing the appropriate aspects of the Voting Rights 

Act. 

We’ve got so much good work to do, but, instead, what do we do? 

We harp on a woman’s right to make choices that are hers to make. 

And that, to me, is very offensive. 

And, with that, Ms. Richards, I would like to yield to you the balance of my time to answer any unanswered question that you 

might have. 

Thank you. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you so much, Congresswoman. 

Well, I would mention, too, to the chairman that I believe we’ve 

actually given the forensic report already to you and provided that 

a while back. But we can follow up if there’s any questions. 

I appreciate your comments. I think we have now had either— 

today, the 14th vote will be on restricting women’s access to health 

care in this country. 

And I think, going back to one of the questions on the other side, 

this is about women’s choice to me. This isn’t about Planned Parenthood. It’s about allowing women in this country and particularly 

women of low income or who live in areas that are underserved by 

other healthcare providers, it’s allowing them to make their own 

decision about their pregnancies, about their health care, and 

about where they get services. 

And many women come to us even if they have other options because, frankly, we are the best at women’s health. And I think they 

deserve the right to make their own decisions about where they access the doctor and clinicians of their choice. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
51 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you. 

Reclaiming the last 25 seconds of my time, it seems to me to 

be—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. No. The gentlewoman’s time has more than 

expired. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Oh, I’m so sorry. Would you indulge me 

for 10 seconds? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We really—if I do that, I’ve got to do it 

both. I’ve got to keep going. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. You have done it, Mr. Chairman. With 

all due respect, Mr. Chairman, you have done it. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Ten seconds. 

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. It just seems to me that this is not the 

appropriate time to be making decisions about defunding Planned 

Parenthood, when we don’t even know why we want to do it. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

So the gentlewoman had made—asked unanimous consent to 

enter into this—into the record this GPS Fusion analysis. 

I’d also like to add on to that, if I could, the digital forensic analysis report delivered to Alliance Defending Freedom, prepared by 

Coalfire Systems. 

I’d ask unanimous consent that both of these be entered into the 

record. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We’ll now recognize the gentleman from 

Texas, Mr. Farenthold, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I might want to talk a little bit about one of the reasons we 

need to take a closer look at the funding of Planned Parenthood, 

not just as a result of these videos but as a result of some financial 

issues that are coming up. 

As president of Planned Parenthood, you’re aware, of course, that 

Planned Parenthood of the Gulf Coast—that’s the Houston area— 

Planned Parenthood last year paid a $4.3 million settlement for 

false claims made to Medicaid in the Texas Women’s Health Care 

Program. Is that not correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And you’re also aware that the Obama administration’s Department of Justice contended that Planned Parenthood had submitted false claims against the women’s health program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware of that. 

I do know that we’ve been the target of the same group that has 

filed many, many, many lawsuits. And that’s the one area I know 

that was settled in order for the—— 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Well, let me read a little bit from the settlement. It’s—the United States contends that Planned Parenthood of 

the Gulf Coast submitted false claims and made false statements 

to the United States in conjunction with claims submitted to the 

United States. 

And just, Mr. Chairman, without objection, I would like to have 

this settlement agreement entered into the record. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Without objection, so ordered. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
52 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. All right. So, as a consequence, Planned Parenthood paid $4.3 million to 

settle those claims just 2 years ago. 

Are you aware that, this spring, another audit by HHS Office of 

the Inspector General concluded that Planned Parenthood—it overbilled taxpayers another $128,028 under Medicaid in the Texas 

women’s health program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware of what you’re referring to. I’m 

happy to look at it. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you. 

And are you aware that the Planned Parenthood affiliate in El 

Paso, just a few years before, had failed to reimburse its subcontractors for roughly half a million dollars in claims? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware of that. And that organization 

doesn’t exist and hasn’t for years. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. But I’m happy to look at your report. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And, actually, that is another issue I would 

like to bring up. One of the things that we’re talking about today 

is taking some of the money that’s going to Planned Parenthood 

and sending it to community health centers. 

Do you know how many facilities in Texas you have? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t, but I can certainly—actually, bear with 

me 1 minute. I’ll just make sure I give you the right number. 

Now, this may be—I know we just opened one in Plano. So I 

think we have 38 health centers. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thirty-eight. And there—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It may be 39 now. I’m not sure. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And so we’ve got 732 community health centers. Admittedly, some of those focus on pediatrics or men’s health 

care or other specialties. But wouldn’t you admit there are substantially more facilities, federally qualified facilities, that offer women’s health care than there are Planned Parenthood facilities in 

Texas? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, actually, I think, Congressman, one of the 

big problems in Texas is there has actually been a drop in access 

to women for health care, and particularly after Planned Parenthood was, for political reasons I believe, taken out of the women’s 

health program. We had a 25-percent drop in women’s access to 

basic preventive care, and particularly in some areas like the Rio 

Grande border that are vastly underserved. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. I think we have three or four facilities down 

in the Rio Grande Valley, if I’m not mistaken. 

I also promised to ask you a couple of questions that some constituents and folks on social media asked me to ask, so I’d like to 

use my last minute and a half to do that. 

Warren wanted me to ask you, what efforts and what steps does 

Planned Parenthood take to guarantee their providers follow State 

laws requiring reporting of child sex abuse? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have very rigorous standards we apply. The 

health and wellbeing of our patients is our number-one concern, 

and we certainly comply with all State and Federal laws. And if 

there is ever an issue, we take swift action. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. Okay. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
53 

And Peg and Allison both expressed a concern about the same 

thing the chairman did when he began this questioning about the 

activities of the 501(c)(4) organization that Planned Parenthood has 

helped fund, you’ve helped manage, and funds have been transferred into for lobbying in almost exclusively Democrat political 

campaigns. 

One of my concerns is, with your purported goal of making access 

to women’s health care more available, isn’t the money that you 

are diverting to a lobbying effort in politics money that could better 

be spent actually delivering health care to women? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, Congressman, as you know, in the State of 

Texas, the number of laws that the State legislature has passed to 

try to restrict women’s access to almost every kind of health care 

requires not only the Planned Parenthood Action Fund but other 

organizations to lobby extensively to try to protect—— 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And let me just note—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —particularly low-income women. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. —one more—you also spoke earlier about how 

you have doctors that are providing women’s health care, and those 

doctors are funded by the taxpayer money under Title X or other 

reimbursement. 

Are some of those doctors also providing abortion? Would you be 

able to afford to have those doctors and keep them entirely busy 

but for the Federal funds coming in? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not sure exactly—that’s a kind of long, complicated question, so I want to be responsive. 

Obviously, Federal funds—the most important thing, I think, out 

of all of that is Federal funds do not pay for abortions at all, except 

in very limited circumstances of when the woman has been raped, 

has been the victim of incest, or when her life is endangered. 

Mr. FARENTHOLD. And I would contend, even though not directly 

spent, they help facilitate it. And that’s one of the reasons I support defunding. 

I see I’m out of time. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

Before I recognize Mr. DeSaulnier from California, after he does 

his questioning, we’re going to do a brief 4- to 5-minute break, sort 

of a humanitarian break, for a moment. And then we will continue—continue on until we get the chance for the rest of the 

panel. 

For those in the audience, I suggest remaining in your seats if 

you want to continue to witness the hearing. 

For those members who have yet to ask questions, hang tight. 

But we’ll go to Mr. DeSaulnier for 5 minutes, and then we’ll take 

a very brief break, and then we’ll resume. 

Mr. DeSaulnier, you are now recognized. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t know quite 

how to take that break after my questioning. Usually it’s better to 

take a break before I ask questions. 

Anyways, I want to thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here, the 

way you’ve carried yourself through this hearing and through this 

recent history and the wonderful work that your organization does. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
54 

And I want to, sort of—two lines of questioning: one, the latter 

part, very specific on the bipartisan history of support for fetal tissue research. 

But the first part is just, in my experience in State government 

in California and then local government, particularly in local government—and in California, the counties provide health care for 

disadvantaged communities, low-income communities—it was always my experience that the clients chose Planned Parenthood, 

when they had the opportunity, because they wanted to, whether 

they were a private payer or not. And we developed relationships 

between the county health system and you because the clients 

clearly preferred you, at least in our community. 

So, in the spirit of local control, it seems to me within the Federal guidance you competed very well in the open marketplace, 

whether it was private pay or reimbursed clients. Is that not true? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I appreciate that. And, absolutely, providing 

high-quality, affordable health care is our entire mission. And so 

we are pleased that many women and men—now we have about 10 

percent of our patients are men—they choose Planned Parenthood 

over other healthcare providers. We believe we provide an excellent 

service that’s affordable, and we do a lot of outreach in the community to provide education, as well. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Yeah. And that was my experience, was that in 

local government you were more efficient and effective, certainly, 

than, with all due respect to my friends in the county system, than 

the county system. 

So, with my colleagues, this is one of those instances where it’s 

a little bit odd listening here. And without being judgmental, it reminds me of the old legal expression, ‘‘When the law is with you, 

pound the law; when it’s not, you pound the table.’’ And that’s just 

my perspective. 

Having said all that, on the specific issue of bipartisan historical 

support for fetal tissue research, 1988—and maybe you could just 

respond after I go through a series of these observations if this is 

correct or not and if you have any other comments. 

So, in 1988, there was a panel called the Human Fetal Tissue 

Transplantation Research Panel. And that panel was established 

under President Reagan; the chairman was a Republican. The 

panel came together and studied the science behind fetal tissue research, and they issued this conclusion, and I quote: It was acceptable public policy to support transplant research with fetal tissue. 

Now, just to be clear, that was a Republican chair of a panel established under President Reagan. Is that accurate? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. And, again, I’ve now just learned 

more about the history, but it was a very—it was a committee that 

had both supporters of abortion rights, opponents of abortion 

rights. It was a very bipartisan effort to come to what seems like 

a very good conclusion that was passed overwhelmingly by the 

United States Senate. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Right. And this panel issued its report. Congress passed, after the report, in consulting with the report, passed 

the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993, and that law set forth the rules 

of how fetal tissue research is done in this country. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
55 

That law, again, was passed with Republican and Democratic 

support. That’s correct, isn’t it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. So the bipartisan line is that, for decades, fetal 

tissue research has had significant bipartisan support. One of the 

reasons this research has had such strong support—and Mr. Lieu 

alluded to this—is because it helps millions of people. 

Recently, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article, and its observations in this regard were, and I quote: ‘‘Virtually every person in this country has benefited from research 

using fetal tissue. Every child who’s been spared the risks and misery of chickenpox, rubella, or polio can thank the Nobel Prize recipients and other scientists who used such tissue in research 

yielding the vaccines that protect us.’’ 

Would you agree with that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. I think probably everyone in this 

room has benefited in some way. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. So, just in conclusion, again, thank you for the 

work you do. 

And, Mr. Chairman, while I appreciate your initial comments, 

particularly as we evaluate, as always, the best and most efficient 

use of taxpayers’ money, at least from my perspective and my opinion, both from a local level, with 14 years of overseeing a relationship in the Bay area with affiliates there—at least at that level, 

we did our due diligence, and this was the most effective and efficient way of investing in our clients’ needs. 

So, with that, I’ll yield back. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Would the gentleman yield? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Glad to hear it. Thank you. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Just one quick question, Ms. Richards. What do 

you like most about your job? 

Ms. RICHARDS. What do I like most about my job? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yeah. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s getting to see the patients that we serve every 

day and the young people who are, frankly, going to have, I think, 

more opportunities than we ever did. It’s great. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

As I noticed prior, we are going to recess for roughly 5 minutes, 

but we intend to start back up again at 12:35. We stand in recess 

till then. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The committee will come to order. 

The next person to be recognized is the gentleman from North 

Carolina, Mr. Meadows, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, thank you for your testimony. 

I’m going to try to take the emotion out of it and stick strictly 

to the numbers. Earlier, you said you need to consider the source, 

so everything that I’ll be quoting comes from Planned Parenthood. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
56 

It is my understanding that 3 percent, according to your Web site 

and your testimony today, 3 percent of the services that Planned 

Parenthood offers are abortion services. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Three percent of—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Of your total services, 3 percent. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sorry, my mic wasn’t on. 

Three percent of the services delivered—I mean, of the total services. 

Mr. MEADOWS. But yet you say that you don’t have the total 

amount of money—you can’t give this committee the total amount 

of money that you make or receive for abortions. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s because the national office doesn’t, as you 

know—or may not know—but the national office doesn’t provide 

healthcare services. Fifty-nine affiliates provide a variety of 

healthcare services, so that would be—every single organization 

would be different. 

Mr. MEADOWS. But your affiliates gather that information, so you 

would have access to that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m sure they have it. I don’t have it myself. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. But how do you come up with the 3 percent? So let me—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s the number of services—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Let me go—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Because we—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Let me ask the question. 

2.7 million women and men are served by Planned Parenthood, 

according to your testimony. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. MEADOWS. 2.7. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Annually, you provide, according to your report, 

327,000-plus abortions last year, according to your annual report. 

I do the math, 2.7 million people, 327,000 abortions, that comes 

up to 12 percent. So how do you get 3 percent? And these are your 

numbers. Why is it not 12 percent? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Because people come to us for—some people come 

to us more than once, and they come to us for different services. 

And some people come to us and they need a pap smear—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Well—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —they need a variety of services. 

Mr. MEADOWS. —let’s go on a little bit further, because I’m having a real trouble coming to this. 

And if you would put up the graph on—this is a tax return from 

one of your affiliates in Rochester-Syracuse region. If you could 

read for me line 2B. What does that say? What is the designation 

there? 

Ms. RICHARDS. ‘‘Pregnancy termination.’’ 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. But—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. And the dollar amount next to ‘‘pregnancy termination’’ there is how much? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It—again, I don’t—I’ve never seen this before, so I’m simply reading what you’re asking me to read. $1,424,275, I’m 

assuming. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
57 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So $1,424,000 for pregnancy termination, according to your affiliate’s tax return. 

Ms. RICHARDS. One affiliate, correct. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. So—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I mean—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. —wouldn’t you have tax returns for all your affiliates, where we could get this information? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I know that we have provided—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Because here’s my concern. If you take the 

number, that $1.4 million, and divide it into the total revenue of 

a little over $5 million, that would indicate revenues of almost 28 

percent for abortions. So what is the—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think you’re mixing services and revenue. 

Because, obviously, above the above line says, ‘‘Family planning, 

$3,718,474.’’ 

Mr. MEADOWS. But wouldn’t you think the 3 percent is a little 

bit misleading—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. Actually, we have—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. —if 28 percent—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We calculate—I mean, we are—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’d say we are the most highly regulated organization probably in this country, and we—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, I would disagree with that, but let me ask 

you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. But we’re very transparent about our numbers. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I’ve got this for one of your affiliates. Will you 

provide this same kind of documentation for all your affiliates to 

this committee? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe we actually already have. 

Mr. MEADOWS. No, you haven’t. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m happy to speak to the chairman, because we have—I believe we—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. This is the only one that had it. Will you today, 

yes or no, provide this for all your affiliates? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have produced all 990—okay, well, we just 

have a disagreement of opinion, and I’m happy to talk to the chairman—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, it’s not a disagreement. Will you provide the 

number of—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have already provided the 990s for all of our 

affiliates, and so that’s—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. But they didn’t outline it like this. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, maybe—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So are you saying that you don’t keep track of it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. You said that. I did not say that. 

Mr. MEADOWS. No, I’m asking you. Do you keep track of it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Every single affiliate in Planned Parenthood 

meets with all the laws and regulations, and they file their 990s, 

and we provide—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. That’s a great answer to a question I did not ask. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We’ve provided—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Would you provide it to this committee? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
58 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t exactly know what ‘‘it’’ is, since I’ve said 

to you—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Well, I’ll tell you what it is. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —repeatedly we’ve provided the 990s—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. It’s the revenue that you, Planned Parenthood, 

derives from abortions. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I have said to you, we have provided—and 

we have been extremely cooperative with this committee and the 

other three committees, and we have provided all the 990s, all the 

audit and annual statements of our affiliates. And if there’s anything after—I’m happy to talk to the staff here about what else is 

needed that we’re not providing. Because I really believe we have 

gone above and beyond in providing everything that’s been requested of us. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. My time has expired. I’ll yield back, Mr. 

Chairman. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. 

Boyle, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BOYLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I also want to thank Ms. Richards for the manner in which 

you have conducted yourself today. 

There was one answer you’ve given that surprised me, when 

Ranking Member Cummings asked what the favorite part of your 

job was. I assumed you were going to say sitting here for 3 hours 

answering these questions from Members of Congress. 

But I do want to focus—a couple of these statistics have been 

cited before; a couple have not. But I don’t think they’ve strongly 

led to a very important point, and that would be the consequences 

of the legislative action that we’re proposing. So let me just briefly 

go through them. 

As has been cited, there are approximately—actually, exactly 2.7 

million women and men that Planned Parenthood see every year, 

correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. 

Mr. BOYLE. And, of that, 1.5 million of those patients receive 

services through Title X, the Nation’s family planning program, 

right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think that—and I’m not—let me make 

sure that I—I want to make sure I answer you correctly. 

About 1.6 million of our patients are either—come to us through 

some Federal program, either Title X or the Medicaid program. But 

a number of them are Title X—yes, Title X recipients. 

Mr. BOYLE. Well, contraceptive services at Title X centers annually prevent 1.2 million unintended pregnancies, which would result, significantly, in 590,000 unplanned births, 400,000 abortions, 

and 190,000 miscarriages. 

So, in a country with approximately a million abortions a year, 

what we’re talking about is, without such Title X services, the services that Planned Parenthood provides and clearly constitutes the 

majority of your work, the number of abortions each year in the 

U.S. would be approximately 40 percent higher. 

I think the consequences of what we’re talking about haven’t 

fully been laid out, not just in terms of the cancer screenings and 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
59 

the treatment of STDs, but also, ironically, in what would be inevitably an increase in the number of unintended pregnancies and 

abortions. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

And it’s interesting, because right now there is such exciting research happening with better contraceptives. Young women now 

can get long-acting, reversible contraceptives. They don’t even—I 

know—I’ve been questioned about why in some cases we have 

fewer visits in some areas, and one of the exciting things is now 

you actually sometimes don’t have to come back to Planned Parenthood every month to get birth control pills because we can provide 

them for 6 months or you can get a longer-acting method. 

And in the States that have really pioneered this work to provide 

women any birth control, we’re seeing dramatic drops in both unintended-pregnancy rate and abortion rates. 

Mr. BOYLE. I also just—and, by the way, I think that’s something 

that we can all celebrate. And maybe the focus should be more on 

how best to provide women the health care they need, and that actually this is something where we can build common ground. 

I did also want to point out—and I think you’ve cited this before, 

and it’s only been mentioned once in these 3 hours. According to 

the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, if this legislation 

goes through, 390,000 women would lose their access to health 

care. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. BOYLE. Where else could they turn? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think that’s the difficulty in that—you’re 

right. I appreciate you bringing back up the CBO study because it’s 

really important. 

As I said earlier, there are some areas of the country where we 

are the only safety-net family planning provider. There’s other 

areas where they—the Medicaid folks who are taking Medicaid patients won’t take any more. Because, as has been discussed by everyone, Medicaid patients—Medicaid payments don’t necessarily 

pay for services. 

But the other thing I’d like to just emphasize is that there are 

women and young people that choose Planned Parenthood even 

though they have other options because we provide very high-quality health care, particularly family planning services that they may 

not be able to get anywhere else, without judgment and without 

shame. 

Mr. BOYLE. Per one of the points you were making in terms of 

the population that Planned Parenthood serves, the statistic I have 

and I think that you’ve cited is that at least 78 percent of Planned 

Parenthood’s healthcare patients have incomes of 150 percent of 

the income—of the poverty level or less. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. That’s correct. 

Mr. BOYLE. So it’s pretty clear we’re talking about people who 

don’t have a great deal of options—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Right. 

Mr. BOYLE. —in anything, given their income. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, and, to me, that is the point, is that I believe low-income women in this country should have all the same 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
60 

options to have high-quality, affordable health care as every other 

woman. 

Mr. BOYLE. Thank you. 

And with 11 seconds left, I’ll yield back. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. DeSantis, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, if a child survives an abortion attempt, should it 

be given nourishment and medical care? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’ve never heard of such a circumstance happening. I—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. Really? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes. I mean, I—certainly—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. So, if it did happen, you would say it would—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I can say—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. —be entitled to it or not? 

Ms. RICHARDS. —at Planned Parenthood, I’m aware of no instance where—you know, we don’t provide abortions after viability, 

so—but, certainly, in my experience at Planned Parenthood, we 

haven’t ever had that kind of circumstance. 

Mr. DESANTIS. But you would say that there would be—medical 

care would be in order, at that point? Forget about Planned Parenthood, just generally. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’d say—I mean, again, I want to be responsible for Planned Parenthood and what we do there. Certainly, in 

this situation—which, again, has never occurred that I know of— 

of a baby born, that baby should, as a mother should, get appropriate medical care from the physician—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. Now, have you watched—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and would. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Have you watched all the videos released by the 

Center for Medical Progress? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I haven’t watched the multi-hour, edited videos, 

but I have read all of the written transcripts—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. So the ones that are on YouTube, you haven’t 

watched those? I know there have been a series of—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, there have been, like, hours and hours and 

hours. So I haven’t—I mean, I’ll just—I did read through all the— 

and I’ve watched many of the videos, and I’ve read through all the 

transcripts that have be provided. 

Again, I would say it’s important that—my position is, I would 

like to see all of the videos that are not edited—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. No, I understand. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and those haven’t been provided. 

Mr. DESANTIS. What about—there was one specific one that 

there was a technician, Holly O’Donnell, that she was describing 

harvesting the brain of a late-term boy. She said she wasn’t sure 

if the baby was alive since his heart was still beating and that she 

harvested the brain by cutting his head open, starting with the 

chin. 

Do you recall that? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
61 

Ms. RICHARDS. That woman does not work for Planned Parenthood, so I can’t really speak to anything that she said. I’m not responsible for her. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Do you deny that her description of what happened is something that does occur in Planned Parenthood clinics—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have never—- 

Mr. DESANTIS. —or its affiliates? 

Ms. RICHARDS. There is nothing that she has ever described that 

I could attest has ever happened. And I—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. So you can categorically testify to that, then? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Categorically testify to what? Because I want to 

be very careful what you’re asking. 

Mr. DESANTIS. That what she described is not something—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I don’t remember that particular video of 

Holly O’Donnell, but I will tell you she has never worked at 

Planned Parenthood, and I—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. She was a technician for StemExpress. But I 

think it was something that was very, very troubling, to sit there 

and read that—or to sit there and watch that video. 

But let me ask you this. Do you admit that Planned Parenthood 

or its affiliates harvest and sell fetal body parts for profit? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We are very clear at Planned Parenthood. We 

have a very clear policy on fetal tissue donation. It’s done with the 

full consent of the patient. And, as I said earlier in my statements, 

it is only currently done in fewer than 1 percent of Planned Parenthood health centers and in one—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. But no profit. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and in one—excuse me—and their one affiliate 

in Washington State that does not receive any reimbursement for 

their costs. And there’s only one other one, which is in California. 

And they have assured us that, whatever reimbursement they receive, it is less than what the costs are for providing fetal tissue 

to that organization. 

Mr. DESANTIS. If that’s the case, then the video with Dr. Gatter 

negotiating over the price of the parts—if there’s no profit being 

made, then why would you be negotiating over how much the parts 

are going to be sold for? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, with respect, I completely disagree with 

your characterization of that. And that is why I read all of the 

transcripts, the full, not these edited, sensationalized videos. And 

what I read—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, there was a—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Because we take this very seriously. I read over 

and over—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. There’s a negotiation—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Over and over and—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. I understand how you are going to—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I just disagree with your characterization. 

Mr. DESANTIS. And that’s fine, and people can judge for what it 

is. 

Let me ask you this. Do you deny that Planned Parenthood and/ 

or its affiliates will alter abortion procedures in order to better harvest fetal body parts? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
62 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have a very clear policy, which I’m happy to 

read to you, about how we allow patients to make fetal tissue donations. Would you like me to—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. So, since the release of the videos, have you or the 

Planned Parenthood Federation issued any updated guidance to 

the companies to whom you provide fetal tissue regarding the sale 

of fetal body parts for profit and/or the manipulation of abortion 

procedures? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I just—there’s no way to answer that because I disagree with your formulation. We allow women voluntarily—— 

Mr. DESANTIS. Let me put it this way. Have you issued any new 

guidance within the past 3 months? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. Although, as I said in my letter to Congress, 

we’ve—I’ve asked our chief medical officer and our medical team to 

review all the work we do—and, again, it’s very limited—in fetal 

tissue donation to ensure that if there are any things that we could 

be doing better, we would like to do that. 

Mr. DESANTIS. My time has expired. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Vermont, Mr. Welch, for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. WELCH. Thank you very much. 

A couple of things preliminarily. 

Number one, there is a sharp disagreement on members of this 

committee about abortion, and I think each side is entitled to mutual respect. There is a significant disagreement about fetal tissue 

research, and each side is entitled to respect. 

What is clear is the law says abortion is legal, and the law has 

limited authorization for fetal tissue research. That’s the law. What 

Planned Parenthood is doing is completely consistent with the law. 

We’re now having an argument about a video that has been redacted and doctored. There’s no dispute about that. All of us would 

like to get the entire video. And, in a prudent investigatory process, 

we would get the evidence before we argued about the evidence 

that we don’t have. So that is a limitation on our ability to get, 

quote, ‘‘to the truth.’’ 

Second, I’m just going to speak for Vermont. Sixteen thousand 

women voluntarily choose to get their primary health care from 

Planned Parenthood. These are individuals of free will acting on 

the basis of what they believe is in the best interest of them getting 

the health care that they need. 

Second, the proposal here that we could transfer the services 

that Planned Parenthood provides to our community health centers 

doesn’t stand up in Vermont. We have community health centers 

that we’re very proud of. Senator Sanders, Senator Leahy, and I 

have all been big promoters. But its clientele is a significantly different population than women who have made a choice to go to 

Planned Parenthood for their women’s healthcare issues. 

So this proposed remedy here would have an incredibly negative 

impact on the choice that Vermont women make about getting 

their basic health care. And, by the way, that health care that’s important to the woman who decides to go to Planned Parenthood is 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
63 

really appreciated by her family, their partners, and the community. 

So what is Congress doing here? We’re having an argument 

that’s never going to end about abortion. But we’re proposing to 

proceed in a way where the effect of our, quote, ‘‘investigation’’ is 

going to have collateral consequences that compromises the ability 

of women to get access to basic healthcare needs. And it’s also in 

the context where it’s undisputed that the services that Planned 

Parenthood provides have helped reduce dramatically teen pregnancies and other pregnancies. 

So I think we should all take a step back here and think about 

what we do before we act. The first medical principle that all doctors follow: Do no harm. 

Ms. Richards, I do want to ask you a couple of questions, this 

alarming inquiry about whether you were selling for—or Planned 

Parenthood was selling for profit body parts. 

We’ve seen a proposed contract from Mr. Daleiden sent to the 

Planned Parenthood affiliate in Colorado earlier this year offering 

to buy tissue samples. And that contract included a compensation 

clause. Were you familiar with that document? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, I am. 

Mr. WELCH. And, in response, your affiliate removed the word 

‘‘compensation’’ and added the following text, and I quote: ‘‘The 

payments shall not, under any circumstances, be calculated in such 

a way as to generate a profit for source.’’ 

So, Ms. Richards, is that what the affiliate did, and was that the 

strict policy of Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So that’s a very good example of what happened 

across the country. This group, who, as I said, are committed to— 

they weren’t really committed to routing out any misdeeds. They 

were actually trying to entrap doctors and clinicians into signing 

bogus contracts and breaking the law. 

Mr. WELCH. So is that—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And so this example is a very good one of where 

they were completely rebuffed—— 

Mr. WELCH. And—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and yet they continued to badger and badger 

and badger our doctors to try to get them to commit to something 

that was unethical or illegal. 

Mr. WELCH. And after your affiliate sent that deletion of the 

word ‘‘compensation,’’ did Mr. Daleiden agree to the terms, or did 

he lose interest? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We never—there was never a contract, you know, 

that I know of that was actually sent back. 

Mr. WELCH. Let me ask another question about a failed attempt 

by Mr. Daleiden. On July 20, you sent a letter to Chairman Upton, 

and you said this, quote: ‘‘In another instance, Biomax offered to 

pay much more, sending the affiliate a procurement agreement 

that offered a payment of $1,600.’’ 

Your letter says this was a, quote, ‘‘astronomical amount compared to the reasonable cost affiliates are allowed to recoup under 

Federal law.’’ Is that right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have that in front of me, but it sounds— 

to the best of my knowledge, it’s correct. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
64 

Mr. WELCH. All right. 

I see that I’m out of time, and I yield back. Thank you. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. 

Walker, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here today. Appreciate your 

testimony. 

I am also married to a strong lady. She is a family nurse practitioner—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Oh, good. 

Mr. WALKER. —helped launch the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner program at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center many years 

ago. 

But we stand together. We have done work in our inner cities, 

in places like Cleveland and Baltimore and New York. And I’m 

troubled with some of the statistics that we’ve even seen out of 

New York, and maybe you can address that. 

I don’t want to talk over you; I want to give you a chance to respond. 

But, according to New York Health Department statistics, we 

now know that there are more African-American babies that are 

aborted in New York than actually born alive. Are you aware of 

that statistic? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not aware of that statistic. 

Mr. WALKER. Okay. If that is correct, would that concern you? 

Because, obviously, Planned Parenthood has more clinics in New 

York State than any other State. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually, that’s not true. We do not. I—— 

Mr. WALKER. What is the number-one leading State? Do you 

have—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think it’s—I believe it’s California. I’ll have to 

look, though, to make sure. 

Mr. WALKER. But if you know that’s not true—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And it’s not only—it’s not only—I mean, Planned 

Parenthood—there are a number of healthcare providers in the 

State of New York beyond Planned Parenthood. It’s one of the better-served—— 

Mr. WALKER. I understand. But we’ve already established that 

somewhere between 30 and 40 percent of all abortions come from 

your organization. So if we’re going to put out the stats, we want 

to make sure that we’re talking correct on the numbers. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I do think, Mr. Walker, it’s a really important point, because I think one of the other—I don’t know what all 

the statistics are that you have, but, of course, the lack of access 

for African-American women, in particular, to basic preventive 

health care, including family planning, is a huge problem in this 

country—— 

Mr. WALKER. It is. And I don’t want to spend—and I agree with 

you. That’s, as I aforementioned, time or places that we’ve served 

and worked in. 

But it does concern me that three times—the African-American 

population is 13 percent, yet they’re being aborted at three times 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
65 

the percent of the population, at 35 percent. That should concern 

all of us. I’m sure it concerns you, as well. I do have a specific question regarding the $32 million that’s sent 

overseas. Does Planned Parenthood send any funds to the Democrat Republic of Congo? 

Ms. RICHARDS. You know, this was asked earlier, and I—— 

Mr. WALKER. We did touch on it, but I want to come back to it, 

yes. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have to get back—honestly, I didn’t bring materials about the—our international global program. I would have to 

get back to you that. I’m not trying to evade it. It’s just not something that I thought was a topic of the committee meeting. 

Mr. WALKER. Well, I hope you would, because we have laws in 

this country that permit—or prohibit us from sending money to 

places where we have sanctions on. And if Planned Parenthood is 

doing that, I would imagine that would be something that would 

concern you, would it not? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We would certainly comply with all the laws both 

globally and domestically. And that’s why I commit to you I will 

get information—we’ll work with the committee to get information 

about the Congo. 

Mr. WALKER. Fair enough. 

I have a question. As a former pastor, 15 years in a couple large 

churches, there were many times where we counseled women at 

different ages, various ages, for different things they were going 

through. Sometimes, 15, 20, 25 years later, after going through an 

abortion, there was still some struggle there. 

I don’t disparage these women for making tough choices. As 

you’ve talked about, many have come from underprivileged communities, didn’t feel like they had options. But of the $500 million of the taxpayers’ money that goes to your 

organization, how much of that is set aside to offer counseling to 

some of those women who are still struggling with that issue? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we are—we don’t—this is what it’s really 

hard to explain to you, because I feel like we’re just—maybe we’re 

not—we’re talking past each other. 

We don’t get a big check from the Federal Government. We’re reimbursed for direct services. But I will—they’re all family planning, 

STD testing, wellness visits. 

I will say, though, where one area I think you and I might agree, 

I would love in this country if we would fully fund, for Planned 

Parenthood or anywhere else, comprehensive counseling services 

for women on a whole host of issues. It is very underfunded, and 

it is really important to us, as well, because we do counseling with 

women every single day. 

Mr. WALKER. I understand that. And I agree that there are some 

legitimate services offered. But this is something that I saw for 15 

years. 

So, of the $1.3 billion in revenue, even if it doesn’t come from 

taxpayers, how much of that is set aside to offer these services of 

women who are seeking counseling? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We counsel—I don’t know how—I could get the 

numbers for you. We counsel women and young people and men 

every single day at Planned Parenthood health centers all across 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
66 

the country, and most of it, as you probably know, is uncompensated care. 

Mr. WALKER. Well, I look at your numbers, and I would tell you 

this: It is amazing as far as the amount of revenue that exists. And 

that’s why I wanted to talk a little bit about how many how much 

you’re sending overseas. But I do have one final question. 

If—this is a big ‘‘if’’—if there is proven to be criminal activity 

through an investigation, would you have any problem redirecting 

the $500 million or the $60 million of the 20 percent that is not 

Medicaid, would you have any problem redirecting that to other 

women’s healthcare organizations who offer genuine health care. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m not going to answer to a hypothetical. 

And again, I—we follow all the laws at Planned Parenthood. The 

health and safety of our patients is our number one concern. If 

there is any issue ever at the State or local, national level, we will 

address it, and we do so swiftly, and we always have. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Ms. Richards. 

I yield back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

We now recognize the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands, Ms. 

Plaskett, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, 

Mr. Cummings. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here for the inordinate 

amount of time that you have. And I reiterate so much of what my 

colleagues here on this side of the aisle have said regarding this 

hearing and some of the concerns. You and your office know that 

I vocalized to you privately the fact that I’m displeased that 

Planned Parenthood is not present in my own district in the Virgin 

Islands or in any of the territories, which have approximately 4 

million people. And the reason I’m displeased about that is because 

I know the good work that Planned Parenthood does in preventative health towards women. With the Virgin Islands having 141 unplanned teen pregnancies per 1,000, when the national rate is 29 

pregnancies per 1,000, I see how important the work that you guys 

do is to different areas. 

And, you know, the chairman has seven clinics in his area in 

Utah. And Mr. Chairman, we would be glad to take any one of 

them in the Virgin Islands to be able to support women’s health 

and the work that you do, knowing that 78 percent of those seven 

clinics are in rural areas. 

And I know that this committee is searching for truth, and that’s 

the purpose of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. 

And I believe that we need to do that in a neutral and evenhanded 

manner that reflects the integrity of this committee. 

Which is why I think that this is a premature committee hearing, if not the fact that the other side, the individual that the minority has requested to be here, Mr. Daleiden, is not here. And 

while I understand that Mr. Daleiden has had restrictions on the 

videos being produced, he has not produced one document that has 

been requested by this committee from either side. 

Ms. Richards, do you know how many documents, how many 

pages of documents Planned Parenthood has produced? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Will the gentlewoman yield? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
67 

Ms. PLASKETT. No, not at this time, sir. Afterwards I will leave 

you some time. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I know thousands and thousands of pages of documents. 

Ms. PLASKETT. I think it is 20,000 pages. And I know that the 

Ranking Member Cummings has sent a request for documents, and 

the Chairman Chaffetz and Representative Jordan have sent their 

own request for documents. And a subpoena was issued and it has 

not, not one page of documents, although I understand that, from 

the testimony, that the videos were, in fact—there was a question 

regards that. 

And so, Ms. Richards, I want to ask you some questions since we 

only have Planned Parenthood here, and we only have your documents that we are able to put up, and put up on screens and for 

you to be able to be questioned about, not the other side, which as 

an attorney is a little problematic for me to be able to get to the 

truth if I don’t see both sides of the evidence being presented to 

me. But I understand that there are several States that have 

launched investigations against Planned Parenthood. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, there have been a variety of—I mean, we’re 

constantly being, you know, overseeing our healthcare services. 

And, yes, I think as a result of this recent campaign, there have 

been various State—— 

Ms. PLASKETT. And I understand that several of those States 

have cleared Planned Parenthood of any wrongdoing? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. That’s correct. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And that there has not been produced any credible evidence that your organization has broken a single law. Is 

that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe that’s true. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And, however, there is plenty of evidence that Mr. 

Daleiden and his associates have violated both Federal and State 

laws. One example is his group obtaining tax-exempt status and 

apparently solicited charitable contributions under false pretense. 

Ms. Richards, are you aware that the Center for Medical 

Progress obtained a 501(c)(3) status as, I quote, a ‘‘biomedicine or 

bioengineering organization.’’ 

Ms. RICHARDS. All I know is what I’ve read in the paper about 

the organization. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And that that, in fact, is a fake organization that 

filed official paperwork with the State of California to create a 

sham tissue procurement company called BioMax Procurement 

Services, LLC? Ms. Richards, as far as I know, illegally filing false 

paperwork with a State agency is—it’s illegal and against the law, 

right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It may be. I don’t know. And I know there is a 

lawsuit now pending, and I think the Attorney General of California has indicated that there will be an investigation. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And so for me, for us to have this discussion with 

you without having the balance of the other side, becomes problematic. 

Mr. Chairman, did you want to say something at this point? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
68 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yes. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. 

She made a suggestion that Mr. Daleiden had not been responsive 

to our inquiries. That’s not true. We issued a subpoena, he responded within the time. That package that arrived has not been 

opened. It’s in our safe. He’s unable to provide all of the documents 

given that there is a temporary restraining order. We understand 

that. 

House counsel is involved. Mr. Cummings and I evidently agree 

on this point, that we’re trying to get all of that information. But 

to suggest that he was nonresponsive is simply not true because he 

did respond within the time allocated under the subpoena. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Well, it’s my position, Mr. Chairman, that until 

you’re able to open all of those documents and receive all of them 

and we’re able to balance them against the documents, the 20,000 

pages of documents produced by Planned Parenthood, that this is 

an unfair hearing and that we’re not getting the documents we 

need to do that. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Will the gentlewoman yield? I agree that 

we need all the information. That’s why Mr. Daleiden was not invited to this hearing. The subject is exactly what I said in my opening comments and statements, which many members have asked, 

inquired about. It’s the funding component. We did not title this 

hearing as a hearing on the videos. It caused some controversy, but 

we have, in the essence of time, some legitimate discussion about 

a continuing resolution and ongoing funding for Planned Parenthood, and we have laid that out. But my comments were not about 

the video, it was about the funding. That’s where my concern lies. 

And we will—— 

Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Chairman—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. —we will get to, hopefully, see all of those 

videos, but we have got to get past the restraining order that has 

been put in place by a judge in California. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Chairman, if we’re going to discuss funding, 

and knowing that Members of Congress can sit here and ask questions that run the gamut, and that funding question is related to 

those videos which are the genesis of the question of whether to 

defund, then I think it’s a little naive of us to think that that discussion can be done in a vacuum without the videos and the other 

documents from the other side. 

And I think that my time is up. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Would the gentlelady yield, with the chairman’s 

indulgence. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. In fairness to the gentlelady, I’m looking at the 

memorandum from the majority and it talks about background for 

this hearing. In the first sentence, under background, it says: ‘‘Recently released videos demonstrate Planned Parenthood Federation 

of America participates in transactions involving transferring fetal 

tissue for remuneration.’’ And then it goes on. 

But let me just very briefly so that the record is clear, the 

gentlelady referred to documents that we had not received. And, 

again, I would like to briefly clarify one point on the record because 

it is important for the committee members to understand and I will 

be very brief. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
69 

On Friday afternoon the Republican staff informed Democratic 

staff that Mr. Daleiden sent them a package, a FedEx box, but they 

said that they did not want to open it until this week. We thought 

this was strange because if the Republicans delayed opening this 

package, members would not have had enough time to review 

whatever was inside before today’s hearing. 

So our staff also made it clear that if the Republicans wanted to 

use any of this material at today’s hearing, it should be opened immediately on Friday so we could begin to reviewing it as soon as 

possible through the weekend. But the Republican staff told us 

that they wanted to just keep the box closed. They said they would 

not open it and they would not use it at the hearing. 

So, as of this moment, we still do not know for sure what is inside that box from Mr. Daleiden. However, we did receive a copy 

of minutes from a recent hearing in a lawsuit in California where 

Mr. Daleiden’s attorneys apparently told the court in that case that 

they delivered additional video footage to our committee. So even 

more footage that Mr. Daleiden cut from the videos he’s released 

publicly. 

So we went on to—we went on—we want to open the package. 

We want members to have equal access to the videos that are apparently inside. And we definitely want to see what the other footage Mr. Daleiden was concealing from the public. And I’ll yield 

back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah, I want to see all the video too. That’s 

why we issued a subpoena. I wish you all had supported us when 

we issued it. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Again, Mr. Chairman, I have said it before, and 

I don’t want to—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I’m glad to have your support now. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I don’t want to belabor—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I’m glad to have your support. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. No, no, no, it’s not now. We have been—we have 

supported it, and I can show you the documents to show you that 

we—consistently, we have asked that we get all of the tapes. And 

I will certainly, if you give me a few minutes while others are asking questions, I’ll give you the very documents that we sent you 

showing that. Okay? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. All right. We’re going to go now to the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Mulvaney, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MULVANEY. I thank the chairman. And I’ll try and make my 

Democrat colleagues happy and ask funding questions that have 

nothing to do with the videos. How about that? 

Which is more important to you, Ms. Richards, actually providing 

women’s healthcare services or lobbying? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think these two things go hand in hand. 

And certainly what we have learned over the years is that in order 

to be able to provide healthcare services to women you have to also 

be able to advocate particularly for women who are underserved. 

So I think the two things actually go hand in hand. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Fair enough. You spent $21 million on lobbying 

in the last couple years. You spent zero dollars on mammograms. 

Why is that? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
70 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think we’ve discussed mammograms repeatedly and how women’s health care works. So when I go to my 

doctor, I get a breast exam. And we refer to—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. You do a referral. I get that. Why don’t you do 

them? Why don’t you do them? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we’re not a radiological clinic and I actually 

don’t think that’s—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Why not? That is a women’s service. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I guess we could take it up, but we never 

have provided mammograms because we work in concert with folks 

who do provide radiological services. 

We do a number of breast exams—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. You are aware, by the way, there’s people running for President saying that you do provide mammograms. And 

that’s not accurate, is it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, there are a number of people running for 

President saying a lot of things that—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. On that side. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —I can’t certainly rely on. 

Mr. MULVANEY. You said earlier that you don’t make any money 

from Federal funds, right, you don’t make any profit off of Federal 

funds? Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So Planned Parenthood is a national office. We 

have one source of Federal funding right now. It’s a $21,000, roughly, grant for a birth control clinical trial where we are actually reimbursed for costs alone, and that’s the only source of Federal resources that come to the national office. So we couldn’t make a 

profit off that, though. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Where is the $532 million going? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So Medicaid and Title X—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. So when you said you don’t make any money off 

the Federal funds you were talking about the parent, not about 

your operations? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I was trying to explain that the national office, 

and then there are—we have 59 affiliates. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Right. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have 650 to 700 health centers that provide 

healthcare services. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Is it your testimony that none of those make any 

profit off of Federal funds? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I would have to—they’re all reimbursed for 

services that they provide, and I, my experience is that—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. And that provides a profit, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Excuse me? 

Mr. MULVANEY. That provides a profit. You get reimbursed for 

services. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we’re a nonprofit so that—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. You’re a nonprofit that made $127 million last 

year. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We didn’t make money. We don’t make money. 

We actually reinvest money in healthcare services and education 

and a lot of other things. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay, so let’s talk about that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. But I wanted to answer your first question. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
71 

Mr. MULVANEY. Well, I’m going to follow up on that question. 

Now let’s go on to this one. You just mentioned that you don’t 

make money, but you had revenues in excess of your expenses of 

$127 million last year. That’s right. That’s your testimony. It’s your 

numbers. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We raised—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Right. So here is my question. I’m going to get to the question. Where does the money go? Where does that $127 

million go? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So like any organization of our size and scale, a 

lot of our resources are in what is a board-designated endowment 

or reserve. We are a 99-year old organization and so we have built 

our endowment. But also, I’m investing—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. But you retain those earnings. In the private 

sense, you would retain those or you put them in the bank. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I hope they’re in the bank and not just laying around. But certainly, in addition to that, so some are in reserves, and the other is, I have just invested in expanding 

healthcare services and building new clinics in a variety of States 

across the country. That’s not paid for—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. How is that not an expense? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Excuse me? 

Mr. MULVANEY. How is that not an expense? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, it is an expense. 

Mr. MULVANEY. But your books reflect revenues in excess of ex- penses of $127 million. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry, they’re not all out the door, but I’ve 

made commitments to opening up new health centers in New Orleans, in Dallas, in other States in the South. We are opening in 

other States that I won’t mention here. Probably—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay, so let’s say that that money goes towards 

expanding your service. One of the proposals here, Ms. Richards, 

is to defund Planned Parenthood, which includes taking $60 million, roughly $60 million away from what you get out of discretionary funding. If we took $60 million away from you, you could 

still perform every single service that you gave last year, can’t you? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I can’t say that because those—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Well, you made—you said you have revenues in excess of expenses of $127 million. Now, you told me what you’re 

doing with $127 million. You’re spending it. You’re investing it. 

You’re expanding. I get that. But if you’d had $60 million less last 

year you could have provided every single service to every single 

woman that you did last year. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I constantly raise money to expand services 

to the patients that look to us. And so I don’t—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. And God bless you. I think that’s great. But answer my question, please. You could have provided every single 

service that you did to every single woman last year if you did not 

get a penny from the discretionary fund from the United States 

Congress? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I actually disagree. There’s no way I could 

agree to that. These are services that are spread all across the 

country, and I can’t possibly account for how each dollar that I 

raise—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
72 

Mr. MULVANEY. You still would have had—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —which is committed to other services and expansion of services could simply replace Federal dollars. 

Mr. MULVANEY. That’s not expansion of services. I’m talking about services you actually provided. You would have had $67 million—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we’re expanding services beyond what we 

already provide. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Not that. That’s not my question. My question 

is, if we had not funded you last year, you still would have been 

able to provide the services. And I think the answer is, unequivocally, yes. You might not have been able to expand your services, 

but every single woman that walked into every single clinic would 

have been served if you had not received that money from Congress. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I disagree, but—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. And we are just trying to figure out why, 

why you would disagree with that. Revenues would still exceed expenses even with $60 million less. 

Ms. RICHARDS. So do you want me to start talking? Are we now 

having this conversation? I’m sorry, I wasn’t sure if we’re finishing 

this? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah, sure. 

Ms. RICHARDS. So I raise money every single day to expand services, education services to people in America. That’s what we do at 

Planned Parenthood. And like any other nonprofit, we reserve 

money for all kinds of services that need to be expanded, assistance 

that needs to be provided, and that’s what we do with our money. 

We are a nonprofit. We don’t do anything else with our money 

other than put it back into the services, the education, and sometimes the advocacy that we provide. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I’ll now recognize the gentlewoman from 

New Mexico, Ms. Lujan Grisham for 5 minutes. 

Ms. LUJAN GRISHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Ms. Richards. 

And if this committee is going to undertake how Medicaid money 

is used and not used by every healthcare provider in every State 

and every local government in the United States, it might be a very 

interesting hearing about how we can assure that the Medicaid 

funds that are not reaching so many still, even with the progress 

of the Affordable Care Act, so many women and so many families, 

that would be a hearing that I think would be well worth having. 

I’m going to go back to both the funding aspects here, the unintended consequences. And really, I appreciate the comments of all 

of my colleagues, but Mr. Welch and Mr. Boyle. I served as the 

New Mexico secretary of health and one of my challenges was certainly to deal with teen pregnancy, but to also make sure that we 

had the right partnerships and viable access on a public health system where women and their families could get access to healthcare 

services that were of high quality and services that they trust. 

I can tell you something you already know, that without Planned 

Parenthood we could not meet those access points, and quite frankly, even in the public health system there are many women, parVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:05 Jul 31, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26029.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
73 

ticularly in rural and frontier areas of the State who, A, did not 

have access or would absolutely under no circumstances choose 

that access, where I’d like to tell you that our record about prevention and preventing pregnancy was better in the public health system. 

And that was in a world where we didn’t have the 2008 budget 

issues, where our State now is not putting money into public 

health or expanding public health or working on women’s health 

care. And without the Affordable Care Act our rural hospitals and 

community health centers would all but be closed. And I will tell 

you that we now have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the country, with efforts at looking at what we can do for 15-year-olds to 

prevent the second and third pregnancy. 

Women need and deserve unfettered, high-quality, confidential 

access to comprehensive health services. And I’m hearing from 

hundreds of constituents, and I also know that thousands of New 

Mexico women and their families will not have access to these services because it is all connected. And even if it wasn’t, we’d still 

want them to have the choices that they make that are right for 

them. 

But with all of the funding issues that we debate in this Congress, I know unequivocally that they don’t have access in many of 

the places that they should. And under the Equal Protection 

Clause, they certainly ought to with Medicaid funding. 

Can you talk a little bit more about what States like New Mexico 

with these high teen pregnancy rates, without public health access, 

without those rural access points, where would those 21,000 

women go? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, thank you for your service in the public 

health arena and for your question. I do think it’s incredibly important that we’re constantly looking at new ways to help particularly 

young people access information and services. And it sort of goes 

back to the chairman’s question maybe earlier, which is one of the 

things we do at Planned Parenthood, in addition to providing Medicaid family planning services, another is, we now run education 

programs all across the country and through the Web that have an 

average of 6 million visitors every single month and visited by 

young people and by their families, English and in Spanish, because many people don’t have access to adequate sex education in 

their communities. 

In addition, we are looking at more ways to provide birth control 

through—virtually, so that actually you can order it online and 

don’t have to be in a clinic, because for many rural Americans it’s 

very difficult to access a family planning provider in your community. 

So those are the kinds of things—— 

Ms. LUJAN GRISHAM. They’re just not there. I have a pastor in 

my district who’s let me know that he refers women to Planned 

Parenthood because he knows that there aren’t the right community access points. And I know it has been touched on in this committee, but I have personal experience and know many of my constituents in their 20s and 30s and 40s who without the comprehensive healthcare services would have died from cervical cancer. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
74 

And I know exactly how important, again, in a State that has 

higher per capita averages in many of these cancer areas for these 

populations, and particularly for minority populations, that we 

want to do a much better job investing in comprehensive health, 

simply do not have it. And the notion that we would continue to 

discriminate against those populations by not providing adequate 

Federal funding and access makes no sense if what we’re trying to 

do is to maintain my choice about my high-quality confidential provider. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here today. I appreciate your 

testimony. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thanks for letting me be here. 

Ms. LUJAN GRISHAM. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

Members are advised we have two votes on the floor. There are 

approximately 8 minutes left in this first previous question vote. It 

is the intention of the chair to recognize Mr. Hice for his 5 minutes 

of questioning, then we’re going to go to recess, then we’re going 

to have to come back. We thought we could get through it, but we 

still have a number of members who have questions. 

So we’ll now recognize Mr. Hice for 5 minutes. Then we’ll go into 

recess and we’ll reconvene after the votes. 

Mr. HICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, just a point of clarification. It’s already been established that Planned Parenthood serves a lot of underprivileged people. And I just want to be clear. In your testimony you stated that 

it is significantly more difficult for individuals on Medicaid to access a provider as opposed to someone with a private insurance because so many providers now are not accepting Medicaid. Is that 

correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Medicaid patients. It really varies across the 

country, but certainly there are some States where it’s very difficult. 

Mr. HICE. And that’s one reason that you would say that Planned 

Parenthood is needed, because there is a gap there. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think we’re—I mean, I think we have tried 

to demonstrate that we are an important provider of Medicaid services to a lot of folks in this country. 

Mr. HICE. But particularly the underprivileged and—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, that’s who, I mean, I guess by definition, 

yes, that’s who is on Medicaid. 

Mr. HICE. All right. So you also said in your testimony that the 

Government Accountability Office found that about two-thirds of 

the States are challenged now recruiting OB–GYNs because of the 

difficulty in ensuring provider participation in Medicaid and that, 

according to the CBO—this again is in your testimony—that by 

next year, ObamaCare is expected to reduce the uninsured, and 

nearly half of those are going to be on Medicaid. 

So from these testimonies from—or these statements in your testimony, is Medicaid, in your opinion, a substandard insurance? 

Ms. RICHARDS. In my opinion is it—no. 

Mr. HICE. Is it an inferior product? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m not sure—I’m not exactly sure how to 

answer that. I think it’s important that Medicaid—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
75 

Mr. HICE. Well, this is according to your testimony, and I just 

want to know. 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, no, I didn’t—I don’t think I said that, so I just 

want to make sure I’m clear what you’re asking. I think it is important that Medicaid patients be able to get the same kind of quality 

of care as other insured people. 

Mr. HICE. But you said they can’t, they’re not able to because so 

many providers are not—let’s go on to some other things. I was just 

curious and those were some questions that I had jotted down. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. HICE. It seems to me that there is a question mark there. 

You praise it on one end, Medicaid, and then—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s very important. 

Mr. HICE. —say it’s a problem on the other, and that’s why—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, it’s not—I hope I didn’t misstate that. I don’t 

think Medicaid is a problem. I think the challenge is, because the 

reimbursement rates are very, very low in many States, there are 

not enough doctors and healthcare providers that will take new 

Medicaid patients. It’s something that everyone struggles with. 

Mr. HICE. Okay. Let’s go further. I do have some other questions. 

We have also established today that there has been excess revenue, as you describe it, other than, say, in profit, excess revenue, 

nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars in the last 10 years, $127 

million last year. We can break that down in a number of different 

ways. And yet, at the same time, dramatic reduction in prenatal 

care, preventive services, cancer screening, and so forth. 

And do you have any idea, by the way, how many Planned Parenthood clinics have closed over the last 10 years? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have those exact numbers. And you’re referring to a lot of things I’d have to go back and look at charts for. 

I think we’ve addressed—although I know not everyone is here for 

all of it—why some women’s healthcare services aren’t needed on 

an annual basis anymore. But many of our Planned Parenthood 

health centers have merged to be more efficient. We started 99 

years ago, and I will be candid, there’s not always totally efficiency—— 

Mr. HICE. Okay, well, let me go on. There’s been over 100 that 

have closed just over the last—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Or merged. Well, I would say, or merged. 

Mr. HICE. Closed or merged, whatever. But the bottom line is, 

you stated just a few moments ago that this $127 million, threequarters of a billion over the last 10 years, that you are largely 

holding it and using it for investment purposes. Why is it on the 

taxpayers’ hook to provide for your investments in expansion when 

you are declining your services and clinics are closing? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t think the Federal—the Federal Government isn’t investing in our expansion. In fact, the Federal Government—— 

Mr. HICE. The taxpayers are, according to—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Federal Government—— 

Mr. HICE. You’ve got $127 million over the last year that’s excess. 

Ms. RICHARDS. None of that is Federal dollars, I’m sorry, that’s 

all raised by private—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
76 

Mr. HICE. All right, so we have $60 million that are Federal dollars that comes through the discretionary fund. Why do the taxpayers need to be providing $60 million when you’ve got $127 million a year? I mean, I’m just going back to the question already 

asked. I’m trying to find, why is the taxpayer responsible for your 

expansion? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not holding the taxpayers responsible for our 

expansion. In fact, the money that is paid for by the Federal Government through Medicaid, through Title X, through CDC grants, 

or HIV/AIDS programs, all pay for services directly provided to patients. And there is strict accountability and we are accountable. 

HHS looks at all of the Medicaid payments. 

So this is—we are grateful for the opportunity to serve patients 

who come into us on those programs. I think we provide very high 

quality, and that’s why patients continue to come to us. And I 

think patients, regardless of whether they’re on Medicaid or not, 

should have the option to go to the healthcare provider of their 

choice. 

Mr. HICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

The committee will now stand in recess and reconvene no sooner 

than 2:00 p.m. But we’ll will be beholden to the conclusion of these 

votes. The committee stands in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will come to order and we will resume our hearing 

regarding Planned Parenthood. 

We are now going to recognize, if the gentlewoman would—I 

need her to change. 

If we would—we’ll now recognize the gentleman from Missouri, 

Mr. Clay, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CLAY. Ms. Richards, welcome, and thank you for your patience for being here so long. Let me start with the point that a 

lot of Republicans have relied on these doctored videos to accuse 

Planned Parenthood physicians of violating Federal laws. Just yesterday, the Missouri attorney general, Chris Koster, just completed 

his investigation of Planned Parenthood and found no wrongdoing. 

However, I want to walk through some of these accusations and 

ask you to give us the facts. 

Just as a preliminary matter, does Planned Parenthood receive 

any Federal funding for its tissue donation program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, not that I’m aware of. 

Mr. CLAY. Okay. Let me ask about the accusation that physicians 

are illegally altering abortion methods to harvest fetal tissue in violation of Federal law. First, here is what the law says. Doctors 

must certify, and I quote, ‘‘no alteration of the timing, method, or 

procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for 

the purposes of obtaining tissue.’’ This provision applies to federally funded research involving the transplantation of human fetal 

tissue for therapeutic purposes. 

This has been confirmed by the Department of Health and 

Human Services, which wrote that the Department, and I quote, 

‘‘has not funded or conducted this specific type of research in recent 

years.’’ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
77 

So even though this law does not apply to Planned Parenthood 

affiliates, you have still issued guidance that is consistent with the 

law. Is that right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. So just to be perfectly clear, the 

Federal law you’re citing doesn’t apply to Planned Parenthood because it, as you said, it only applies to donations for related transplantation research funded by the NIH. 

One other thing, Congressman Clay, actually I would like to 

mention, that when all of this came up, I actually wrote to the NIH 

and said if it’s time to review the way fetal tissue research is done 

in this country, we welcome that. It’s a very small part, obviously, 

of what we do, only 1 percent of our health centers even allow for 

tissue donation. But it seems that it would be an appropriate forum 

for biomedical ethicists and researchers and doctors to do that, and 

we welcome that if the NIH chooses to do so. 

Mr. CLAY. Wonderful. Wonderful. 

Okay, let’s turn to these accusations. David Daleiden and the Republicans accuse Planned Parenthood physicians of changing the 

timing, method, and procedure of abortions solely for the purpose 

of obtaining fetal tissue. So let me ask you directly, do Planned 

Parenthood physicians alter the timing, method, or procedure of an 

abortion solely for the purpose of obtaining fetal tissue for research 

in violation of Federal law? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, first, just to go back, as we’ve established, 

Federal law doesn’t apply, and yet our own standards and guidelines go above and beyond what’s required. I have spoken with our 

chief medical officer and she assures me that she knows of no instance where the method or the procedure or the timing of an abortion was altered in any way in order to facilitate what is the patient’s desire to donate fetal tissue for fetal tissue research. 

Mr. CLAY. Let me ask you, when the physicians do make clinical 

adjustments during the course of the procedure, why would they do 

that and how does that work? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m not a doctor, so I can’t speak to everything that doctors do. But I do know that our number one goal at 

Planned Parenthood is the health and safety of our patients, and 

so patient—certainly our doctors’ number one goal is to make sure 

that if it is an abortion patient, that they have a successful procedure. And I know from talking to doctors all across the country, 

long before any of this happened, that doctors do all kinds of 

things, as do all surgeons, I assume, make decisions in the middle 

of procedures to ensure a good outcome. 

Mr. CLAY. Let me—let’s move to a different accusation, which is 

that women are not consenting to participate in these tissue donation programs. Can you speak to that, that women may not be consenting to donating the fetal tissue? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Women are fully consenting, and they consent at 

Planned Parenthood prior—certainly prior to an abortion. And one 

of the interesting things that has happened, in part as a result, I 

think, of all of the press, is that there are more and more women 

asking if they could actually donate fetal tissue because they understand the importance of the research that’s done. But, again, we 

only have two affiliates now who are able to, you know, can help 

women who want to make a fetal tissue donation. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
78 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for your response. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. [Presiding.] The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from 

Oklahoma, Mr. Russell. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

And thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here today. 

How much total revenue collected or reimbursed for Planned 

Parenthood and its affiliates comes from abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe we provided all of our financial information. I don’t have that number. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Do you have a ballpark? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, I don’t. But again, we have provided—I know 

there was some back and forth about this, but—and I just verified 

it on the break. We provided all of the 990s, not only for the national organization, but our 59 affiliates, and I believe the audited 

financial statements. 

Mr. RUSSELL. I guess if we were to extrapolate from the Planned 

Parenthood Web site of the cost of an abortion, the average cost, 

or of an abortion pill, it would be at $1,500 for the service of abortion or $800 for the pill. If you multiply that times 327,000, that 

would come somewhere between 40 percent or 22 percent of a figure. Regardless, it’s $491 million down to $261 million just from 

the ballpark figures we see on Planned Parenthood’s Web site. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I have to—could I just, I’m sorry to interrupt, 

but actually that is not—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. If you could very quickly. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s not accurate. But in any case—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, then would you be willing to provide us what 

the accurate figure is, and when could you provide that to us? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, what was inaccurate is, I think, what you 

reported in terms of the cost of an abortion. Obviously, it varies 

State to State, so I can’t say, but I think your number was high. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, we would await the accurate figures and 

when would you provide those to us? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have said to the chair, and we have been abundantly cooperative to this committee, we’ve provided thousands and 

thousands of pages of documents. And I’m happy to work with the 

committee and the staff and with my team to provide other information that you need. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Okay. And I appreciate that. We’ll continue on. 

Absent Federal funding, what effect specifically would it have on 

the organization’s ability to provide abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry, could you restate your question? I don’t 

think I understood it. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes. Absent Federal funding, what specifically 

would it have on the organization’s ability to provide abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, okay, I hope I’m answering your question 

correctly. No money, no Federal dollars go to Planned Parenthood 

or other hospitals or other healthcare providers to provide abortion 

services. 

Mr. RUSSELL. So it would have no impact, is that your answer? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No impact on what? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
79 

Mr. RUSSELL. On abortion services. 

Ms. RICHARDS. If we were not reimbursed for family planning, for 

preventive care—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. No, I’m asking specifically. Absent Federal funding, what specific impact would it have on abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I can’t think of a specific impact. I’m just trying 

to make sure I—I really am trying to be responsive to your question. 

Mr. RUSSELL. No, and I can see that. Thank you. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Can Federal funds be used for abortion equipment? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Federal funds are only, in my understanding, and 

if there is something that I—there may be something I’m unaware 

of—but Federal funds can only be used for abortion services in very 

specific instances which I—we talked about earlier, which is if a 

woman has been raped—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. Sure. 

Mr. RUSSELL. —if she is a victim of incest, or if it is the life of 

the mother. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, I’m curious on the equipment, on the salaries, cleaning services, rent and maintenance of facilities, what 

about that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So let me just—on the abortion services, and on 

Federal funding for abortion services, these are—this is actually 

done through the States. That’s where Medicaid funds come 

through, and they—I can get—we could look at any specifics on 

that. But that is oversight by—— 

Mr. RUSSELL. Okay. We would like that, if you could answer to 

that, because I realize—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s the Federal Government, though, that actually is making those decisions. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, thank you. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s not—I mean, just it’s not Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. RUSSELL. For the record, Mr. Chairman, we’ve heard testimony today that 2.7 million received services in the last reported 

year. That number is actually over 3 million when you add the 

327,000 aborted children to that figure. For the record, 2.7 million 

receive services and 327,000 receive a legal termination with no 

right to choose life. 

Three of my five children are adopted. It is my firm belief and 

the financial evidence substantiates that Planned Parenthood 

clearly does not need taxpayer funding to survive. We can carve up 

a child and call it a choice. We can destroy human life and call it 

health care. We can make the killing of children legal and pretend 

it is beneficial. We can cover acts of barbarity with the veneer of 

civility. But we cannot escape our accountability before the Creator 

of life. 

And with that, Madam Chairman, I yield back my time. 

Mrs. LUMMIS. The gentleman yields back. 

The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. 

Cartwright. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
80 

And, Ms. Richards, I want to thank you for being here today. I 

want to ask about Planned Parenthood’s Federal funding since 

that’s supposed to be the topic of today’s hearing. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Uh-huh. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. What we’re hearing is that Planned Parent- hood receives about $500 million in Federal funding every year, 

and it is easy to see why you hear that figure a lot because it is 

an awful lot of money. And it seems like, I mean, the way you hear 

it, it sounds like Planned Parenthood receives a big check, a big 

cash payment every year. But I want to break down the numbers. 

According to the data compiled by the GAO, something like 80 percent of Planned Parenthood’s government-related revenue in 2012, 

about $400 million, came from Medicaid reimbursements. 

I think that’s the point you’ve been trying to make today, is that 

it comes in the form of Medicaid reimbursements through the 

States for activities such as cancer screenings and wellness exams. 

Ms. Richards, first off, is that figure correct, around 80 percent, to 

the best of your knowledge? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think, to the best myself knowledge, it is correct. About 1.6 million of our patients in a year receive—are covered by some kind of Federal program, Title X, or they are Medicaid patients, or there is a few other programs that we work on, 

HIV/AIDS programs and the like. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. And so is that figure fairly consistent with 

more recent years? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes. And also one thing I just wanted to make 

sure is clear, it’s not all Federal funds. A lot of State funds are 

combined in that figure, and I don’t know the exact breakdown. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Fair enough. 

Ms. RICHARDS. So it’s just not all Federal dollars, is all I meant 

to say. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. But what these numbers really mean is that 

Planned Parenthood affiliates provide a massive number of 

healthcare services to Medicaid patients, and then they are reimbursed on a fee-for-service basis. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s exactly correct. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Is that a fair statement? 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I think we provide really, really good health 

care for Medicaid patients and we’re proud of that. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Okay. Well, I come from a district that has a 

lot of rural territory in northeastern Pennsylvania. We have an 

awful lot of Medicaid-eligible patients. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. So it is an issue of concern to me. Medicaid patients are primarily people who are poor, elderly, or have disabilities, isn’t that right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know the breakdown of all Medicaid patients and certainly don’t know for your area of Pennsylvania. I do 

know how many patients we see in Pennsylvania. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Just in general, Medicaid patients—stay with 

me here—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. —Medicaid patients tend to be poor, elderly, or 

have disabilities, don’t they, in general? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
81 

Ms. RICHARDS. Again, I’m just speaking—I only know of the folks 

we serve, so I can’t speak about Medicaid patients more broadly. 

We don’t serve many elderly Medicaid patients. Primarily we serve 

women between the ages of 18 and 24. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Of course, that’s true. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. And many of Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid 

patients come from medically underserved communities, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. And that’s why the $500 million figure gets 

thrown around so much, that’s why that’s so misleading, because 

this is not an appropriated amount from discretionary spending, it 

is reimbursements for fee-for-service treatment. And like other 

medical providers, Planned Parenthood is reimbursed for the 

health care it provides for these patients, and that’s generally the 

way healthcare insurance works anyway, right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s exactly right. It’s a different insurance program. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. In fact, we rely on providers to take in these 

patients, especially since Medicaid generally reimburses at a lower 

rate than private insurance. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. And I think it’s really important 

because in so many States, as we have talked about earlier, there 

are not that many healthcare providers that will take Medicaid patients. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. In fact, I think Dr. Gosar made that point. 

Medicaid reimburses rather poorly. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It does. Although we are really proud, just looking 

at your State of Pennsylvania, we see 108,000 patients in the State 

of Pennsylvania, and many of them are in rural communities. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Well, so when we hear talk about defunding 

Planned Parenthood, a big part of that is excluding Planned Parenthood affiliates from Medicaid, isn’t that right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Correct. Essentially, and that’s what is important, 

I’m so glad you made this point, because we can’t make it strongly 

enough, as you said, we don’t get an appropriated amount of 

money. This would actually—what Congress is proposing doing 

would deny people on Medicaid the ability to go to the provider of 

their choice, and many of them do choose Planned Parenthood for 

a whole host of reasons. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Thank you for being here, Ms. Richards. 

I yield back. 

Mr. JORDAN. [Presiding.] I thank the gentleman. 

The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Carter, is recognized. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, you were kind enough to provide this committee 

with a list of the salaries and compensation of the officers of 

Planned Parenthood. That is correct and up to date, is that right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sure it is if we provided it. 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. Well, thank you. And I’m looking at this and 

I’m seeing an employee at Planned Parenthood’s affiliate in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota was paid $459,827 in 

2013, is that correct? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
82 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have the figures in front of me. I do happen to know that affiliate is—this is a woman who has been a 

healthcare professional for decades. 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Okay, $459,000. And it is correct that you were compensated $590,000 in 2013, is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I tried to address this earlier, my salary—— 

Mr. CARTER. I understand. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, did you like—I’m sorry—— 

Mr. CARTER. I’m just—yes, or no? Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. $520,000 is my annual salary, and there was a 

benefit that was accrued to me over several years. 

Mr. CARTER. And $590,000 was your compensation in 2013? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s set by the board of directors. And it’s important to me—— 

Mr. CARTER. All I need to know is yes or no. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —no Federal funds go to my salary. 

Mr. CARTER. I understand. But $590,000, $590,000 was what you 

were compensated in 2013, according to what you provided this 

committee with, correct? Yes. That is—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Your Honor, you’re answering your own question. 

Mr. CARTER. All right. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think I’ve answered the question. 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. Well, let me ask you about the travel for Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood spent over $5 million on 

travel in 2013. That’s almost $14,000 a day. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, that—— 

Mr. CARTER. Was that first class or was any of it chartered jet? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Boy, that would be nice. No, I’ve never—I don’t 

fly first class. 

Mr. CARTER. But $14,000 a day. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have 8 million supporters in this country. We 

provide health care to 2.7 million people. We provide sex education 

to 1.5 million people. And—— 

Mr. CARTER. Is that number correct, $14,000 a day? Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have the figures in front of me. But I’m 

happy to look—— 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. Well, that’s what you provided and I just 

want to make sure. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m happy to look at them. 

Mr. CARTER. Can you provide this committee, can you provide 

this committee with the records that show the modes of travel that 

you have taken, whether they have been first class or whether they 

have been chartered jet? Can you break down that travel? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I will work with the committee staff to provide 

whatever we can on the questions that have been asked. 

Mr. CARTER. We appreciate that very much. 

Let me ask you something—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Although I will say for the record, I do not travel 

first class. 

Mr. CARTER. Neither do I, but I don’t spend $14,000 a day either. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I have—— 

Mr. CARTER. Nevertheless, let me ask you, you have made the 

claim that many patients wouldn’t have timely access to basic reVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:05 Jul 31, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26029.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
83 

productive health care if it weren’t for the services of Planned Parenthood. Yet, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

in 2015 said that there are almost 9,700 healthcare service delivery 

sites and over 4,000 rural health clinics, including over 1,200 federally qualified health centers operating over 9,000 sites in the 

United States. 

How many clinics does Planned Parenthood operate? I believe 

earlier you said 650 to 700? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s between 650 and 700, depending. 

Mr. CARTER. But yet if that 650 to 700 were to go away, these 

patients wouldn’t have access to health care? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I mean, I’m looking at the CBO report, the 

Congressional Budget Office just came out with a report that if 

Planned Parenthood, if women were unable to go to Planned Parenthood, Medicaid patients or Title X patients, 390,000 women 

would immediately lose health care next year. 

Mr. CARTER. You know, the problem I have with that—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. So I’m just—I’m reporting back what the government reported. 

Mr. CARTER. —the problem I have with that is that the Obama 

administration reports that there are over 13,000 publicly supported healthcare alternatives in the United States. Have you seen 

that? Are you aware of that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I haven’t seen that. 

Mr. CARTER. That’s what the Obama administration is telling us. 

So that’s almost eight times as many as Planned Parenthood has. 

And out of those clinics, I mean, we’ve got almost—excuse me, I 

misspoke—over 20 federally funded clinics as opposed to every 

Planned Parenthood. Yet those federally funded clinics, they don’t 

have $100 million endowments. They don’t have $70 million dollar 

Manhattan condo. They don’t spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on Grammy-winning performers performing at their galas. 

They don’t do any of those things. Yet, they are able to provide 

services, needed services to women. 

Why is it that Planned Parenthood has got to have that in order 

to provide the same services? Do you believe—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Planned Parenthood—— 

Mr. CARTER. Do you believe that they have to have that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I—— 

Mr. CARTER. It’s yes or no. That’s all it is. 

Ms. RICHARDS. With all respect, that wasn’t really a question. I 

would say I really stand by the fact that we provide health care 

to many, many women in this country who have no other option. 

Mr. CARTER. The question is—the question, Ms. Richards, the 

question was, have you got to have that in order to provide health 

care to women? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We provide—— 

Mr. CARTER. These other clinics don’t have it and they provide 

it. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I’m not going to speak to every other hospital, healthcare center, and FQHC in the country. 

Mr. CARTER. Do you think they have to have it in order to provide health care to women? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
84 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think we provide excellent health care to women 

in this country. And I think the point here—— 

Mr. CARTER. That’s not the question. The question is, do you 

have to have a $100 million endowment, $70 million condos? I 

think not. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know what—— 

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Ms. RICHARDS. With respect, I think it’s important that the question here is, do low-income women in this country have the right 

to choose wherever they want to go to for health care? And 2.7 million of them choose Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. CARTER. Why don’t you let them go to one of those $70 million condos in Manhattan? 

Mr. JORDAN. The gentlelady from Texas is recognized. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for the 

courtesies extended. Let me thank the chairman of the full committee for his courtesies, and to Mr. Cummings certainly for his 

courtesies as well, for my participation in this very vital hearing 

today. 

I am a member of the Judiciary Committee as well, and we held 

such a hearing some weeks ago. And so I can almost say dj vu. 

Let me thank Ms. Richards, first of all, as a fellow Texas, to 

thank her for the legacy of her family that has always been engaged in public service. And that’s what I consider you and 

Planned Parenthood as doing. 

Coming from Texas, let me cite the Houston Planned Parenthood 

offices, of which I have been in and walked through and seen the 

clinics and seen individuals who fell into my arms indicating that 

without Planned Parenthood they would not be able to, in fact, 

have health care. 

Let me ask you very quickly as my time goes, it may be, as I 

have been listening this afternoon, that we have been mixing more 

than apples and oranges. It might be apples and potatoes. Because 

we are talking about abortion. When I say that, many of these 

questions have come forward. And I just wanted to read this quote 

from a Senator in Oklahoma in discussing Planned Parenthood. 

‘‘My focus is to try to deal with the life issue. Defunding Planned 

Parenthood is just a sideshow for the real event.’’ 

Has this come to your attention, Ms. Richards, that many are 

talking about something that really has nothing to do with your 

Federal funding? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I do think it’s been a bit of a theme. And 

I think that is one thing I’d like to say. It’s important that I don’t 

really believe that an organization, a healthcare provider should be 

discriminated against for providing a legal service, whether it’s 

Planned Parenthood or a local community hospital or anyone else. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me follow up as well and hold this up and 

ask unanimous consent to place it into the record. And let me cite 

for some of my colleagues: Ohio, 28 clinics, 80,000 patients, 66,000 

on contraception, total sexually transmitted diseases, 105,000; 

Texas, 38 clinics, 150,000 patients, and 108,000 on contraception, 

and others dealing with sexually transmitted diseases. But if those 

clinics went away, then we are talking about 28 in a big State like 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
85 

Ohio, 38 in Texas, thousands of women losing access to health care. 

Is that not correct, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s correct. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And are you familiar with the Texas cases 

which challenge or discuss the legislative initiative in 2014–2015 

that would literally implode clinics in Texas and the Supreme 

Court decision that ruled in 2014 and 2015? 

I think the United States Supreme Court, maybe based on Roe 

v. Wade, maybe based on the fact that abortion services, which are 

not part of the funding here, but in any event, just so my colleagues would know that, in my State of Texas the law, the State 

law would have cut off 75 percent of reproductive healthcare clinics. The Supreme Court indicated that the Texas law was unconstitutional, indicating that the separate work that you do dealing 

with people’s right to choose is a lawful act and has nothing to do 

with Federal funding. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe that’s correct. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And the Supreme Court has indicated that 

abortion, by law, is not illegal in those cases. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I know a lot of these are still on appeal. I 

do think since we both come from Texas, I think it is important to 

know that when the State of Texas shut down the Texas Women’s 

Health Program and Planned Parenthood’s ability to serve women, 

there are 25 percent fewer women in Texas that are receiving care 

as a result. And so I think that’s why it’s so important that we 

don’t ever put politics ahead of women’s health. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me get these last two questions in. As a 

member of the House Judiciary Committee we deal a lot with the 

FBI. So does this committee as well. Let me just ask you about Mr. 

Daleiden’s work. Is Mr. Daleiden a member of the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation, to your knowledge? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Not to my knowledge. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Is he an FBI agent, to your knowledge? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Not to my knowledge. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Is he a member of the Department of Justice. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe so. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Has the Health and Human Services ever investigated, or investigated you, per se, about your Medicaid reimbursements, meaning something that you have not been able to answer or file in another filing? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We follow all of the laws at the State and Federal 

level every day. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So Mr. Daleiden has been engaged in an investigation, has no authorization, is not a member of the FBI, 

which I would call dastardly and deceitful. So I’d ask you this question: Are you aware that Mr. Daleiden has pleaded the Fifth 

Amendment in some cases that he has engaged in? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have read that in the paper. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Are you aware that it has been checked by RH 

Reality Check that Mr. Daleiden stole the identity of the president 

of the feminist club at Mr. Daleiden’s high school? Have you heard 

that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have also read that in the paper. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
86 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And let me cite not you, but RH Reality 

Check. Would we then, Mr. Chairman, as I finish, would we then 

say that we are here today to speak about the facts. And therefore, 

are you saying on the record today that Planned Parenthood does 

not use any Federal funding for anything that is not authorized 

under the laws of the United States of America? 

Mr. JORDAN. The time of the gentlelady has expired. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Can she answer that question? 

Mr. JORDAN. Of course. 

Ms. RICHARDS. We follow all the laws at the Federal and State 

level, and whenever we find issues we take care of them and address them. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman for his courtesy. I 

thank this committee for its courtesy. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. JORDAN. I thank the gentlelady. 

The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. A few questions. I would just like to 

clear up some things. 

First of all, you talk about the percentage of women who are low 

income served by Planned Parenthood. I am under the impression 

that for defining income, if you have a younger person, a 21-yearold college student, or even a 16-year-old high school girl, that for 

the purpose of defining income you leave out the mother’s income. 

So, for example, if a billionaire’s daughter who made $5,000 last 

year came to Planned Parenthood, she would be considered low income. Is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I would have to check on that. I don’t know of any 

billionaire’s daughters that are coming to Planned Parenthood, but 

I’m happy to look into that and to address your question. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I’m saying for the purpose of the family 

planning waiver, I think it is pretty well-publicized that, you know, 

both high school kids, college kids, they, for the purpose of determining income, they look at their—they are considered a family of 

one despite living with parents. Is that true? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m happy to check on that. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I think a lot of high school or college women, 

they may—at that point they don’t have the resources of their parents, and a lot of young women do come to us because they need 

family planning but can’t talk to their families. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. The next question I have, when I look at 

cities around me that have a Planned Parenthood clinic, usually 

they are what, by Wisconsin standards, they are medium-sized cities, 20-, 30-, 40,000 dollars. Usually in those cities as a guy, I could 

go to many clinics locally that have all of the machines that one 

would need. All of these clinics, as far as I know, take Medicaid 

dollars. So, you know, you could go to any of those clinics to get 

any medical service you could. 

I guess what I’m getting at is, in my opinion, if Planned Parenthood disappeared tomorrow in those towns there would still be 

three or four or five clinics or hospitals providing all the Medicare—all of the medical care you would want, and, quite frankly, 

providing superior care to people who are on Medicaid. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
87 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think we do provide superior medical care, 

but, in any case—— 

Mr. GROTHMAN. I’m saying superior care in the sense that on 

Medicaid, without the deductibles and copays, it’s usually better insurance than other people have. 

I guess what I’m saying is, it would seem to me, if Planned Parenthood clinics were not around in those cities, with the exception 

of a couple of abortion clinics, there would be three or four other 

clinics available to do any women’s health or men’s health or 

health of any nature whatsoever. Don’t you feel that’s true? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I don’t. And I have been to Wisconsin a lot. 

Obviously, you know more about Wisconsin than I do, but I know 

we have 22 health centers in the State of Wisconsin. And, last 

year, we provided—or the most recent year we have figures, we 

provided health care to 65,000 people. And, actually, I think we are 

the largest—don’t quote me on this, but I will check to make sure. 

But I think we’re the largest family-planning provider of the network in Wisconsin, so that’s pretty hard to replace. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Well, no. I think you’re not answering my question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Oh, I’m sorry. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. If you have a city in which there are four clinics, 

full-service clinics that you could go to for anything under the sun, 

and a Planned Parenthood clinic, I would assume that if the 

Planned Parenthood clinic disappeared you would have four or five 

other clinics to deal with anything that Medicaid paid for. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we just haven’t seen that to be true. I mean, 

I use the example of the State of Texas, where they eliminated 

Planned Parenthood as an option in communities, and 25 percent 

of women lost access to care. 

So I actually don’t think—there are a number of reasons that 

women go to Planned Parenthood. It’s personal choice, as well as 

availability, as well as the services we provide. And, for many 

women, we are the provider that they think best meets their 

healthcare needs. And I do think that’s really, kind of, what’s at 

stake here. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. 

You emphasized before the lack of ability of access to health care 

for minorities. Do you feel that you have a special role to fill there? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry, I just—it’s very hard to hear you. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I apologize. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Before, you emphasized that you felt there was 

a lack of access of health care to minorities. Do you feel that you 

have a special role to play there? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We have a special role to play for anyone who is 

underserved, and that includes folks of low income, folks of rural 

America, folks in areas of the country where there is less public 

healthcare access. So it really is all across the gamut. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I’ll give you one more question and come 

back to the prior one. In Wisconsin, all of the Planned Parenthood 

clinics are in sizable cities in which there are, as far as I can see, 

probably multiple other medical providers. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
88 

Is there anywhere in the country that you know of, any metropolitan area in which Planned Parenthood offers services in which 

there are no other providers to take Medicaid dollars? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I—it’s just beyond my—what I know. I can’t really respond to that. 

But I think, again, if we’re in 22 communities in Wisconsin, 

which we are, according to these records, that’s a lot of—I’m not 

saying those aren’t all decent-sized cities, but that’s a lot of rural 

community, as well. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for being here, Ms. Richards. 

Planned Parenthood Action engages in political activity; is that 

correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which is a 

separate corporation, does. 

Mr. PALMER. And you’re compensated by that organization? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I mean, my—I get compensation really to 

reimburse for my costs—— 

Mr. PALMER. Yes or no, for brevity? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m just trying to explain. I’m sorry. 

Mr. PALMER. I understand. And I know how these things work. 

But the answer is yes or no, and I think you’ve already answered 

it. 

It’s, what, $31,000? Is that about right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t have the figures for last year, but whatever my compensation was, it is for work that I do on behalf of the 

Action Fund. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. Where does Planned Parenthood Action get 

its funding? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Private donations. We have 8 million supporters 

in this country and a number of donors from all over, all over the 

country. 

Mr. PALMER. And is there any money from Planned Parenthood 

that goes to Planned Parenthood Action? 

Ms. RICHARDS. They’re not—there is—the Planned Parenthood 

Action Fund, which is—it does advocacy and it does electoral work. 

There is advocacy work—— 

Mr. PALMER. But that—I know what they do. I’m asking—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think I’m trying to be responsive to your 

question—— 

Mr. PALMER. I know, but for—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —right? So—— 

Mr. PALMER. —brevity’s sake and out of respect—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well—— 

Mr. PALMER. —for brevity’s sake—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —as you know, for 501(c)(4) organizations, they 

cannot do a majority of their work as electoral work. That’s under 

IRS Code. 

Mr. PALMER. I understand. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And so more than 60—— 

Mr. PALMER. I understand that. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
89 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think between 65 and 70 percent of the work 

of the Action Fund is non-electoral. 

Mr. PALMER. And you also have a PAC; is that correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. Yeah. I was just going to—yeah. Yes, there 

is a Federal PAC. 

Mr. PALMER. All right. And that Federal PAC, how much—just 

round figures, what did it spend in 2014? 

Ms. RICHARDS. How much the Federal PAC spent in 2014, I can 

get that for you. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not being evasive. It’s obviously public record. 

I just don’t have it with me. 

Mr. PALMER. Where do they—where does the PAC get its money? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It raises its money from individuals—— 

Mr. PALMER. Are you compensated—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and sometimes—— 

Mr. PALMER. Are you compensated by the PAC? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe I have any—have ever been compensated by the PAC. Although I know that the Federal law requires, if you are doing work on behalf of a Federal candidate, I 

believe you actually have to—your time has to be paid for by a 

PAC. So we follow all the—— 

Mr. PALMER. And do you have any oversight over the PAC? 

Ms. RICHARDS. —laws and regulations. 

Mr. PALMER. Do you have any oversight over the PAC, any managerial responsibility? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sure. I mean, in some—— 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. Well, you’re supposed to be compensated if 

you do any work for the PAC. And you need to check that out. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I just—I think—— 

Mr. PALMER. I want to go to this. In 2004, you founded a group 

called America Votes, a coalition of 42 national grassroots organizations focused on elections. 

How many of these organizations collaborate with or are incorporated into Planned Parenthood’s political operation? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m sorry. You’re asking me about a job I had before Planned Parenthood; is that correct? 

Mr. PALMER. That is correct. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. But can you restate—— 

Mr. PALMER. With a focus on elections. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sorry. Can you restate the question? We’re just 

out of—I was just out of context. 

Mr. PALMER. How many of these organizations are collaborating 

with or have been incorporated into Planned Parenthood’s political 

operation? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I really don’t know. I—— 

Mr. PALMER. So I would assume that some do, because you can’t 

answer it. It’s either a yes or no. Some have, or—they’re either 

there or they’re not. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I really don’t—well, I think you asked me how 

many, and I said I don’t know. 

Mr. PALMER. Let me—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. A lot of these organizations work together. But I 

don’t—again, we could get more information for you. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
90 

Mr. PALMER. That would be helpful. 

You’ve got these high-paid executives. There’s—interestingly 

enough, 44 of your highest-paid executives make more than any 

Cabinet member; 28 of them make more than any member of the 

Cabinet. And you’ve got—that’s over $200,000. You’ve got another 

11 who make over $300,000. That’s more than anybody in the Cabinet, any Supreme Court Justice, the Chief Justice, the Vice President. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t think—— 

Mr. PALMER. You’ve got four that make more than the President, 

not counting you. 

Are any of them expected to make political contributions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. By who? I’m sorry. 

Mr. PALMER. By you? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. 

Mr. PALMER. Do you direct political contributions to candidates? 

Ms. RICHARDS. The PAC does. 

Mr. PALMER. Yes, but do you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It votes on it. 

Mr. PALMER. —have any input in who gets—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, but there is a PAC committee that votes on 

it. 

Mr. PALMER. Are you on that—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. You’re asking me a question, and I’m trying to be 

responsive. 

Mr. PALMER. Are you on that PAC committee? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not on the PAC committee. 

Mr. PALMER. Do you have any input into who gets political contributions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. The PAC committee votes on—— 

Mr. PALMER. So there’s no collaboration between you and the 

PAC committee. You’re saying for the record—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I haven’t sat on a PAC committee meeting for a 

long time. 

Mr. PALMER. All right. Let me ask you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. But, I mean—— 

Mr. PALMER. —your PAC advertised itself—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —we operate absolutely—you know, we meet the 

Federal laws and restrictions. 

Mr. PALMER. I appreciate how you want to answer this. 

Your PAC advertised itself as being nonpartisan. Yet, in 2014, 

100 percent of the contributions went to Democrats; in 2012, 99 

percent went to Democrats. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I actually don’t believe that’s accurate, but—— 

Mr. PALMER. That’s what’s reported here. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. Well, I’ll go back and look, but we support—we’ve done work on behalf of—— 

Mr. PALMER. I just—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We support anyone who supports women’s rights. 

Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time. 

I just want to point out that it’s not nonpartisan and that you’ve 

given almost—I mean, in every case, almost every dime to Democrats, including to nine members of this committee. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
91 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we welcome any Republican who supports 

women’s rights and women’s healthcare access and—so thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman yields back. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. 

Gowdy, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a couple of questions for Ms. Richards, and then I’m going 

to yield whatever is remaining to the chairman. 

Ms. Richards, Peter Welch sits right down there on the other 

side. He’s a gentleman from Vermont who’s a Democrat. Peter and 

I do not agree on very many issues, but there’s not a more wellregarded Member of our body, I don’t think. And he evidenced that 

today by making it crystal-clear that he makes an effort to understand both the analysis and the conclusions of those who may have 

a different position from the one that he holds. 

Do you understand how some of us may, at a base level, disagree 

with you on the origin of life? Do you make that same effort to understand that my friend from Vermont, Peter Welch, makes? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I fully respect—and I think I spoke to this in my 

opening statement with the chairman—that I understand people 

have different feelings about whether abortion should be legal in 

this country or not. I think it is important that it is legal, and we 

can disagree. And I know thinking people disagree about abortion. 

And our goal at Planned Parenthood is to be judgment-free and 

to allow people and women in particular to make their own decisions about their pregnancies. 

Mr. GOWDY. Well, we’re going to get to the judgment-free zone 

here in just a second. But you mentioned abortion. How about partial-birth abortion? Do you understand how some of us may support 

a ban on partial-birth abortion? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I—I don’t want to—I’m not trying to be argumentative, but that was a political formulation, not a medical 

formulation. But I certainly understand that it was passed and is 

the law of the land, and Planned Parenthood certainly meets the 

requirements of that law. 

Mr. GOWDY. Well, my question wasn’t whether you follow the 

law. My question was whether or not you understand how some of 

us may be very much opposed to that practice. That was my question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I understand how people can disagree based on 

their religious beliefs, their background, their own personal experiences. And I also understand that people sometimes change over 

time. And that’s the human condition. 

Mr. GOWDY. Are you suggesting those who hold a contrary view 

to you need to change? Is that why you added that line, Ms. Richards? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. I’ve just, candidly, in my 10 years at Planned 

Parenthood, I’ve seen—I’ve experienced, myself, people who have 

picketed outside of our health center and then found themselves in 

need of our services, and we try not to judge—— 

Mr. GOWDY. And I’m sure that there have been employees who 

grew tired of participating in the practices that they were participating in, and they may have gone to the other side, might they? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
92 

Mr. GOWDY. How about opposing abortions on the basis of gender 

or race? Can you understand how people may support legislation 

that ban that? 

Ms. RICHARDS. As I tried to say, I appreciate that people have 

a lot of different views on the issue of abortion, and there’s any 

number of different pieces of legislation you could describe. 

And I think, fundamentally, at Planned Parenthood, we take the 

position that we trust women to make their decisions about their 

pregnancies. I’ve made my own decisions, as well, and so I feel like 

I walk—— 

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Richards—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —I can kind of walk in these shoes. 

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Richards, I appreciate the way you like to frame 

the issue, that you’re the reasonable one and those of us who have 

a contrary position are not reasonable. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I didn’t say that. 

Mr. GOWDY. No, that’s exactly—that’s exactly the last answer 

you gave. That’s exactly what it was, much like your people evolve 

to a more advanced viewpoint, much like that comment was also 

directed to that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Those were not the words I said. I said sometimes 

people change their opinions. 

Mr. GOWDY. No, it’s not always what you say. Sometimes it’s just 

what you mean. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I—— 

Mr. GOWDY. In 2014—you disagreed with my colleague’s 100-percent figure. What percent of your money did go to Democrat candidates in 2014 if it wasn’t 100 percent? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I told him I will look. I know that we support Republicans across the country. And I wish there were more Republicans who—— 

Mr. GOWDY. Name me some. Name me some Republicans in Congress that you support financially. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we don’t actually want—in this public 

forum, I’m not going to raise their names because they have been 

such the target of their fellow party members, but I’m happy to 

provide that to you later. 

Mr. GOWDY. Well, the donations are public. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Uh-huh. And some of them—yes. I’m not—I don’t 

know in terms of Federal office. I was thinking more broadly in 

terms of support for candidates across the country. I know there 

are Republicans that we support. And, again—— 

Mr. GOWDY. Well, let me ask you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —we would like to support more Republicans for 

office. We wish there was—we don’t believe that women’s health or 

women’s rights should be a partisan issue. 

Mr. GOWDY. And we don’t—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I wish it weren’t. 

Mr. GOWDY. And we don’t think eating dinner salads and drinking wine while you’re discussing infanticide—we have a problem 

with that, too. So I’m sure you can understand why we would be 

as viscerally opposed to what we saw in some of the tapes, would 

you not? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
93 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think we—I just think we may have a—I feel 

like everything I’ve answered you’ve seen a different way. So I respect your opinions, and I am always open to listening to other people’s opinions. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman’s time has expired. I thank 

the gentleman. 

We’ll now recognize the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Blum, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. BLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here today. I think it’s down 

to you and I. 

Ms. RICHARDS. No kidding. Okay. We could do this somewhere 

else. 

Mr. BLUM. Can you tell me briefly about your background? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m a Texan. I—— 

Mr. BLUM. Your professional background. 

Ms. RICHARDS. My professional background. 

Mr. BLUM. What makes you qualified—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Oh, shoot. I thought you wanted to go back to the 

beginning, because I was born in Waco, which I’m very proud of. 

I was a labor organizer for many years with low-wage working 

women. I eventually had three kids, moved to Washington, D.C. I 

had the honor of working for Leader Pelosi for a period of time here 

on Capitol Hill. I’ve started a couple of nonprofits. And then, about 

10 years ago, I was hired to be the president of Planned Parenthood. 

Mr. BLUM. Now, do you have any accounting in your background, 

any finance in your background? Do you understand—I assume you 

understand well accounting? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have taken accounting courses as part of my— 

fortunately, my board has been very kind and offered me those 

kinds of—that kind of supplementary learning in my job. But I 

have a—obviously, we have a chief financial officer, we have an entire accounting department at Planned Parenthood that I work 

with closely. 

Mr. BLUM. The reason I ask is, in a former life, I was a public 

company CEO, so I know a fair amount about revenues, expenses, 

overhead costs. So I’d like to talk a few minutes with you about 

that. 

What’s your understanding of overhead? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well—— 

Mr. BLUM. What is overhead? 

Ms. RICHARDS. What is overhead? 

Mr. BLUM. Yes. What’s overhead in Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, generally—— 

Mr. BLUM. What are overhead expenses? 

Ms. RICHARDS. —generally, it’s the cost of what things that—just 

to keep the organization going. Is that what you’re—— 

Mr. BLUM. Salaries? Building expenses? Rent? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It really depends on—it depends on what you’re 

talking about. If we’re in a grant, it could be—potentially, overhead 

could be considered. It really just depends. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
94 

But, yes, of course, all organizations, I assume, and the one you 

ran, as well, we have an office, we have staff, we have electricity, 

and—— 

Mr. BLUM. It must be considerable in a half-a-billion-dollar corporation, or nonprofit. The overhead must be considerable. It has 

to be, to run that big of an organization. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I guess it depends on your definition of 

‘‘considerable.’’ But, yeah, we have a very dedicated staff. And we 

provide health care to a lot of people, education to a lot of people. 

And so, yes, it requires—— 

Mr. BLUM. Do you profit or make money on abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. So I’ve—I think we’ve discussed this many times, 

and I’ll just try to take it one more time. 

So I run the national office. We do not provide abortion services. 

We have provided to this committee, if you’re on the committee, all 

of the financial information about the national organization, our 

audited financial statements, our 990s. 

Mr. BLUM. Do your providers—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And we’ve also supplied—— 

Mr. BLUM. —make money on abortion services? Your providers, 

do they make money? Your individual affiliated offices, do they 

make money providing abortions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I think you’re—— 

Mr. BLUM. In general. 

Ms. RICHARDS. In general? There is no general. I mean, we are 

a nonprofit. There’s three sources of income. There are Federal and 

public funds—— 

Mr. BLUM. I’m talking about individual abortion, though. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —there are donations, and there are—— 

Mr. BLUM. If someone cannot afford to—what’s an abortion cost? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It depends, depending on the State, depending 

on—— 

Mr. BLUM. What if someone can’t pay for it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. —the procedure. Excuse me? 

Mr. BLUM. What if someone can’t pay for the abortion? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We raise private dollars to try to help women who 

cannot afford abortion services. If they choose—if they choose that 

they want an abortion and they can’t afford it, we try to raise 

money to help supplement the cost of an abortion. 

Mr. BLUM. Only through private donations do you make up the 

difference is what you’re saying. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I don’t, but—— 

Mr. BLUM. Correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. —our 59 affiliates have a variety of donors—— 

Mr. BLUM. Does Planned Parenthood make a profit or make 

money on reimbursement of Medicaid services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We don’t make a profit on anything. But in terms 

of Medicaid—— 

Mr. BLUM. Well, it depends on how you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. Let’s just—— 

Mr. BLUM. You have 127 million—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Let’s talk about Medicaid. 

Mr. BLUM. —excess dollars every year. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
95 

Ms. RICHARDS. Medicaid is very—yeah, Medicaid is very easy. 

Medicaid reimburses. And, as you know, across the country, Medicaid rates vary widely. In some States, they come closer to paying 

for the cost of the services. In a lot of States, we actually have to 

raise private donations to supplement what it costs for—— 

Mr. BLUM. So you may make money on some Medicaid reimbursement services, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know that anyone does, but I’d be happy 

to find out. 

Mr. BLUM. And I’m sure you’re well aware it’s against Federal 

law to use taxpayer funds for abortions—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m abundantly clear on—— 

Mr. BLUM. —except for rape, incest, and life of the mother. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —abundantly clear on that. And we are heavily 

regulated, as HHS regulates Medicaid services. 

Mr. BLUM. Are you saying today with 100-percent surety that not 

one dime of taxpayer money is used to provide abortions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. What I said earlier—— 

Mr. BLUM. I mean, yes or no, 100-percent surety? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, because, actually—— 

Mr. BLUM. Because that is against the law. 

Ms. RICHARDS. The Federal law allows for Federal dollars to pay 

for abortion services in very rare—— 

Mr. BLUM. Correct. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —instances: rape—— 

Mr. BLUM. So other than those instances. 

Ms. RICHARDS. —incest, and the life of the mother. We don’t use 

any Federal dollars for any abortion services except for those that 

are—— 

Mr. BLUM. What about the profits generated from—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —permitted by law. 

Mr. BLUM. —those Federal dollars? Are any of those used to 

cover abortion services? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Sorry. We were kind of talking over ourselves. 

You’ll have to repeat it. I just didn’t hear. 

Mr. BLUM. The profits generated from taxpayer-funded sources, 

such as Medicaid reimbursements, are any of those profits 

used—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe—— 

Mr. BLUM. —to help cover the cost of abortions? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. And I don’t believe there—I will absolutely— 

we can go through all of our 990s, happy to go through with the 

committee, but I don’t believe there are any profits from any Medicaid services in this country. 

As I’ve said, one of—that’s one of the issues we’re addressing 

here, is there are too few people willing to take Medicaid patients, 

because often the Medicaid payments do not pay for the cost of 

birth control, a pap smear, a breast exam, and the like. 

Mr. BLUM. And what’s critically important is how you apportion—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentleman’s—— 

Mr. BLUM. —or apply the overhead services. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sorry. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. BLUM. I’m sorry. I yield back. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
96 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. 

We’ll now recognize the gentlewoman from Tennessee, Ms. Black, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. BLACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for allowing 

me to sit in on this committee. 

And I thank the witness for being here today. 

Ms. Richards, on September the 18th of this year, you stated 

that H.R. 3134, the Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015, 

would, and I quote, ‘‘block access for folks who deserve high-quality, compassionate care,’’ close quote. 

Now, Ms. Richards, I would like an opportunity for you, as I ask 

you these questions, to give you an opportunity to change these 

false claims. 

So I wrote the Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015, so let me 

tell you what it does do. It does not—it does not reduce public 

health funding by a single dime, and it would, in fact, increase that 

funding for community health centers by $235 million. 

Were you aware of these facts when you made that statement? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Congresswoman, we’ve discussed many times 

today that, in fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that 

if—— 

Mrs. BLACK. Reclaiming my time—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —women were denied the ability to go to Planned 

Parenthood, 390—— 

Mrs. BLACK. Reclaiming my time, you said it would block access. 

It would block access. 

Now—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. For our patients, it would block access. 

Mrs. BLACK. —yes or no, Ms. Richards, do you acknowledge that 

community health centers outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 

by roughly 20 to 1? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know the exact number. I know there’s 

more community health centers than there are Planned Parenthoods. 

Mrs. BLACK. So you will acknowledge that they outnumber 

Planned Parenthood clinics. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m happy to acknowledge that. 

Mrs. BLACK. Okay. 

And yes or no, Ms. Richards, do you acknowledge that these facilities funded under my bill provide a broader range—these facilities actually provide a broader range of services than what is offered at Planned Parenthood—for instance, mammograms? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m not an expert on what all community health 

centers provide. I know we work in close collaboration with them, 

and, in fact, often they send us their patients that they can’t see 

for birth control. 

Mrs. BLACK. But you will acknowledge that you do not provide 

mammograms, which was acknowledged in this committee today? 

Ms. RICHARDS. We’ve never made any—— 

Mrs. BLACK. So that would say that they do actually provide 

more extensive services than what you provide there at Planned 

Parenthood. 

Ms. RICHARDS. What I said to you, though, is I don’t know what 

all the community health centers provide. We’re very clear about 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
97 

what we do provide at Planned Parenthood and about the number 

of women who voluntarily choose to come to us because of our 

care—— 

Mrs. BLACK. So, reclaiming my time again, because I have just 

a very short period of time. 

So knowing that the House-passed bill actually increases public 

health funding and redirects those Federal dollars to clinics that 

offer more preventative health care than Planned Parenthood, you 

can’t substantiate your claim that the bill blocks access to care. It 

does not block access to care. 

Now, I do want to just end this by saying—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I simply disagree. 

Mrs. BLACK. —that you had a statement that you made, that 

quality, affordable health care is your entire mission. And you 

made that statement. I actually wrote it down when you made it. 

Why would you not make an executive decision, then, to temporarily discontinue your abortion services, which only represents, by 

your testimony, 3 percent of the services that you provide, and continue providing what you consider to be your entire mission of 97 

percent of the services provided? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, because abortion is a legal service in America. 

Mrs. BLACK. But—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And we think it’s important that women—you 

quoted me as saying quality, affordable health care, and that includes access to quality and affordable abortion services, as well. 

Mrs. BLACK. But you acknowledge that—do you say abortion is 

health care? Do you consider that health care? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, it’s a healthcare service for women. In fact, 

3 in 10 women in this country have accessed an abortion at some 

point. 

Mrs. BLACK. So you define health care—abortion as health care. 

Ms. RICHARDS. It absolutely is part of women’s health care, and 

women will tell—I think women would agree. 

Mrs. BLACK. Well, I’m a nurse, and if you look at medicine, abortion is not health care. It is not considered to be health care. 

Now, let me turn to one other thing that you continue—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. We just simply agree to disagree on this matter. 

Mrs. BLACK. Well, let’s look at the definition. 

But let me just finish up here, because you have continued to say 

that these videos were doctored. Are you aware of a report that just 

came out today that has been released by Coalfire that shows in 

their report—and they say the ‘‘forensic analysis removes any 

doubt that the full-length undercover videos released by the Center 

for Medical Progress are authentic and have not been manipulated. 

Analysts scrutinized every second of video recorded during the investigation released by CMP to date and found only bathroom 

breaks and other non-pertinent footage had been removed.’’ 

I would say, if you were to compare the two companies now that 

have done this investigation, you see Coalfire has reported on every 

second of those released audio and video investigation footage as 

opposed to the Fusion report, which only had four full-length videos. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
98 

So I think this discussion, Mr. Chairman, is still yet to be had 

about just what these videos do show and the fact that they perhaps, coming from Fusion, are not doctored. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentlewoman. 

The end is in sight. Ms. Richards, you’ve been exceptionally kind 

with your time, and generous. We have a couple of cleanups that 

we need to do here, a couple other questions, and then we will be 

concluding. 

We’ll start by recognizing the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan. 

Mr. JORDAN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Richards, since the videos surfaced, has anyone from CMS 

or HHS contacted you, any of your board members, or any of your 

staff? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Since the videos surfaced—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Surfaced, July 14. Has anyone from the Health and 

Human Services or CMS contacted you or anyone on your staff or 

board? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know. I could—I don’t know. 

Mr. JORDAN. We need the answer to that. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s a—I mean, we have a very big staff, so—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Has anyone from the inspector general’s office at 

HHS contacted you, anyone on your board, any one of your staff? 

Ms. RICHARDS. If you’re going to ask me about everything—about 

any contact with any—we have a big board, and we have a very 

big staff. So I’m—I can’t really—— 

Mr. JORDAN. Has the Attorney General of the United States, Loretta Lynch, contacted you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. No. 

Mr. JORDAN. —contacted Planned Parenthood, anyone at 

Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, she may have—I don’t know. I—— 

Mr. JORDAN. You don’t know? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have hundreds of staff, and we have a very 

large board. 

Mr. JORDAN. Has anyone from the Justice Department contacted 

Planned Parenthood since the videos surfaced? 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I’m telling you I don’t know if you’re asking 

about everybody that’s involved in Planned Parenthood—— 

Mr. JORDAN. You don’t know? So, I mean, if the Justice Department would contact Planned Parenthood, it would seem the person 

who’s in charge of Planned Parenthood would know the answer to 

that question. You don’t know? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, we have a very large staff. And so you’re 

asking me—— 

Mr. JORDAN. But you’re here testifying, the videos and the funding and everything else in front of a congressional committee. And 

I’m just asking—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Mr. Jordan—— 

Mr. JORDAN. I mean, there’s potentially four crimes that—potentially, we don’t know, but may—four crimes may—transferring 

fetal tissue for valuable consideration, changing the procedure to 

obtain—to solely obtain tissue, doing this without patients’ consent, 

and performing partial-birth—there’s potentially four Federal 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
99 

crimes. And all I’m asking is, has the Justice Department contacted 

you? 

Ms. RICHARDS. What you asked me not is whether they had contacted me. You asked if they had contacted anyone at Planned Parenthood or anyone on our board. 

Mr. JORDAN. You’re here representing Planned Parenthood. Have 

they contacted Planned Parenthood? 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I said to you I will find out. I don’t know. 

Mr. JORDAN. Since the videos have surfaced, have you had any 

conversations with the President of the United States? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, I have not. 

Mr. JORDAN. Since the videos have surfaced, have you been to 

the White House? 

Ms. RICHARDS. No, I have not. 

Mr. JORDAN. How many times have you been to the White 

House? 

Ms. RICHARDS. During what period of time? 

Mr. JORDAN. Since Mr. Obama’s been President. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t know. That’s been, I think, 7 years, so I 

would have to get back to you on that. 

Mr. JORDAN. Our count shows that you, your board members, 

and senior staff have been to the White House 151 times in 6 1/ 

2 years. I’m just curious—that’s why I asked the question—if 

you’ve been to the White House or you talked to the President 

since these videos have surfaced. 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I said I had not. 

Mr. JORDAN. And you’ll get back with me on if the Justice Department has contacted you since these videos have surfaced. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I think you listed several folks, so I’m happy 

to work with the committee and find out what all you need to 

know. 

Mr. JORDAN. CMS, HHS, inspector general, Justice Department. 

Justice Department is the most important. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’ll work with the committee staff and work with 

my team. 

Mr. JORDAN. I would—I thank the chairman. I’ll yield to the gentleman from South Carolina. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Thank you. 

Ms. Richards, I want to follow up very briefly on the line of questioning that Mr. Clay had earlier this afternoon. He asked you if 

any—if there were any Federal funds being used in what he 

termed the tissue transfer program. 

Do you remember that question, ma’am? 

Ms. RICHARDS. It’s been—I’ll be honest, it’s been a long day. 

Mr. MULVANEY. That’s fine. Well, he did ask you, and I think— 

my recollection is that you said no, and then you paused, and then 

you said not that you were aware of, and then he continued the 

question. 

That caught my attention—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. MULVANEY. —because it struck me that the answer to that 

question should be an unmitigated no, not no, not that you are or 

I am aware of. So let me ask you this—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
100 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I certainly don’t believe so. Again, it’s—I’ve 

been here for several hours, and so I’m just being—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Fair enough, but let’s start from scratch and just 

say—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —just trying to be very careful. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. Are any Federal funds being used in relation to what we have described here today as the tissue transfer 

program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I do not believe so. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. Since that is other than an unmitigated 

no, I’m going to ask you some followup questions. 

Have you done any investigation to find out if Federal funds 

have been used in that program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe they have been, and so there hasn’t 

been any need for any investigation into that. But I’m certainly 

happy to get back to you on it. 

Mr. MULVANEY. No, you don’t have to—I think you answered the 

question. I asked you if you had done any investigation, and you 

said no. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, because I don’t think it’s been a—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. That’s fine. I mean, that’s your motivation. You 

may not care. But the answer to my question is—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I did not say I do not care. And I—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. You could say you couldn’t have time, but the 

point of the matter is, you have not done any investigation on this 

point, correct? 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s not what I said. I said I’m not aware, and 

I will absolutely be happy to get back to you—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. Then let me—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. —and it’s not because I don’t care, and it’s not because I don’t pay attention, at all. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Again, not trying to put words in your mouth, 

Ms. Richards, but let me ask the question again. Have you done 

any investigation as to whether or not any Federal funds have been 

used in the tissue transfer program? 

Okay. By the way, who’s the bald guy sitting behind you? Is he 

a lawyer? 

VOICE. I’m a lawyer. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. That’s fine. Could you—what is your 

name, sir? 

VOICE. I represent Planned Parenthood. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Hold on, hold on. 

Mr. MULVANEY. That’s fine. I just want to know who you are, because you actually—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The questions will go to the witness. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. Then I’ll ask the witness—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. I’m happy to get back to you on this, and 

I really—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. No. No, no, no. No. I’m asking you a question. 

Have you—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I think I’ve answered it as many times as I 

can answer. And I am sorry that my answer isn’t satisfactory to 

you. I’ve been here 5 hours now, and I’m trying to just make sure 

I’m as responsive as I can be, so—— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
101 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. So just so the record is clear—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Mr. MULVANEY. —because there’s a young lady here making a 

record of this, I’m going to ask the question one more time, and 

then you can give me the answer that you deem to be responsive 

to this question. 

Have you made any investigation into whether or not Federal 

funds have been used in the transfer of fetal tissue or fetal parts? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I have not made any investigation to that specific 

question. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Okay. Thank you. Is it possible, then—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I think—— 

Mr. MULVANEY. —that Federal money is being used for that program? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I don’t believe so. 

Mr. MULVANEY. But that’s not based on an investigation, is it? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I feel like we’re kind of—I think we just keep repeating the same questions. 

Mr. MULVANEY. No, it’ll end the discussion today, but it certainly 

won’t end it. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I thank the gentleman. 

A few things just for followup, just so—we’ve had hours’ worth 

of discussion. There are some things that we would like to follow 

up. So I’d like to go through that list as we conclude. Then we’ll 

recognize Mr. Cummings, and then I will wrap up. 

We would like to get the name and number of affiliates that received the majority of their revenues from abortion services. If 

there’s clarification as to what we are looking for, let me know, but 

this is—that is one question. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m just going to try to write it down as you go. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah. And you’ve got plenty of staff there. 

They’ll write it down. I don’t mean to have to have you take notes. 

But if you have a question, I want you to be able to ask me as 

we’re kind of doing this. 

We are looking for the amount of revenue by affiliate for abortion 

services. So you had the—that should be pretty straightforward. 

We would like to know which affiliates provide which services. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I believe you have that, but I’m happy—we’re 

happy to provide that. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We’re still—we want to make sure we’ve 

got it crystal-clear. I think we have portions of it, but we don’t have 

all of it. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. The names of organizations and the countries that Planned Parenthood gives funds to overseas. So, based 

on the tax returns and reports, you’re sending money to overseas. 

Some of them that have been listed as investments; some have 

been listed as other things. 

We’d like to get some detail and specificity as to how much is 

going to which countries and what those are for. Is that fair? 

Ms. RICHARDS. I really have to talk to my team about that, but 

I will. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Is that—okay. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
102 

Ms. RICHARDS. And I’m happy to talk to the committee staff 

about what it is they’re trying—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. That’s great. A lot of this will be followup 

with committee staff. I just want to make sure that we’re on the 

record, what we’re asking for. 

We obviously have some concerns about the Planned Parenthood 

Action Fund. So we’re trying to get to the duties performed and 

compensation received for all Planned Parenthood or affiliate employees. This can be either by—for the Planned Parenthood Action 

Fund or for either of the—I believe there are two 527 organizations. 

One of our concerns is the shared services and the sharing of employees between political activities and nonpolitical activities. And 

we would like to understand how broad-based that is. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Okay. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Okay. 

The cost of reimbursement for both contraception and abortion. 

And abortion, obviously, breaks down into in-clinic as well as the 

pill. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Actually, there’s a lot of other kinds of contraception too. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yes. Contraception I left as broad as I 

could, but for the abortion services—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m just saying I think it’s important. I’m not sure 

we really got into much of that conversation about how birth control—how many different kinds of birth control there are now. Because it’s one of our specialties. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Okay. Well, help us understand what services and money you’re allocated and what the costs of that are. Because there were some points that should be helping to drive down 

those costs, and we’re just not understanding the ratio and 

why—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes, I think there was some—I mean, I—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah. 

Ms. RICHARDS. That’s why—— 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It needs clarification. And I’m not asking 

for it—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. It was clear that folks weren’t aware of the various costs of different kinds of contraception. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Exactly. And that’s where we need help. 

Not right now, just as a followup. 

We would appreciate—the travel seems excessive to us. Now, 

we’re looking at it from afar; there may be a very plausible explanation. But when you have a nonprofit organization who says 

they’re trying to put every dollar they can towards women’s health 

and then people are buying first-class tickets and getting private 

aircraft and chartered aircraft, we’d just like to have an explanation of that. Fair enough? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yeah, I have no idea where that’s coming from. 

But I’m making a list. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It’s in the tax returns. 

Ms. RICHARDS. I’m making a list. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
103 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. That’s where we see it. That’s where we 

see it. There’s boxes to check for certain things. And we would appreciate some clarification. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Happy to provide. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. A list of political organizations Planned 

Parenthood collaborates with, including the names and compensation of received and shared employees. I think I covered that in 

general, but—I’ll keep going. You understand what our question 

there is. 

And then, if there are political donations to Democrats and Republicans, I think most of that is probably, financially, is probably 

publicly disclosed, but if you could help us with that. 

That’s a lot. 

Let me yield now, or let me recognize the gentleman from Maryland, and then we will wrap up. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. As I listen to the questions that you have to answer and the information that you’ve just been asked to provide, 

I cannot help but think about the IRS. Our Republican friends said 

that there were certain organizations that people in the IRS didn’t 

like. They even accused the President. And then they decided that 

they—they said it was unfair. And I understand what they were 

saying, to go through and ask the same kind of things that he’s 

asking you for. I just want to make—I just—it just hit me as I’m 

sitting here and I’m listening to all of this. I think it’s something 

that we ought to give some serious thought to. 

Ms. Richards, I want to thank you for your testimony. 

You know, as I was sitting here, I was just thinking about a 

question—some questions that were asked of you earlier. And the 

implication was, in even asking the question, that you do not respect those who may have a different view with regard to abortion. 

And, you know, I think that that is such—so unfair. Because I 

think—I have heard very few people in this Congress ridicule us 

if one group believes that a woman should have control over her 

own body and should be able to choose abortion if she likes, she 

and her family and, you know, her God, if she makes that decision, 

and then the other ones who don’t believe in abortion. I have not. 

And I’ve been here 20 years. 

I think we basically respect each other’s opinions, period. I mean, 

is that—right? I mean, you respect—— 

Ms. RICHARDS. Yes. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Because a lot of this is a real personal thing. Am 

I right? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Absolutely. It is. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. But there’s one thing that we seem to be sort of 

glossing over and sort of moving around: It is the law. I mean, it’s 

the law. You may not like the law, but it’s the law. And you are 

doing what is within the bounds of the law. 

And, you know, there are a lot of things I don’t like, a lot of laws 

I don’t like. But I still live in the United States of America, and 

there is a system of government. And, as a lawyer and as a Member of the Congress, I’m sworn to uphold those laws. Now, I might 

want to change them. I’ll do everything in my power to change the 

ones I don’t like. But, in the meantime, that’s where I am. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
104 

So I just want to make sure that, you know, that nobody walks 

out of here saying, oh, you know—because people have differing 

views does not mean that you don’t respect the other person’s view. 

I’ve never gotten that impression from you. I’ve read a lot of things 

you’ve written. And so is that accurate? Is that a fair statement? 

Ms. RICHARDS. Well, I hope I’ve showed today that I have total 

respect for this Congress, I have respect for people of different 

points of views. And I really think that’s—it is important that we 

show a respect for people who may make different decisions in 

their lives. 

And I think we need less judgment and more empathy in this 

country for people who may simply have different circumstances 

that we can never know about. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Now, Mr. Chairman, I just have a few questions 

of you so that we’ll be real clear. I would just like to ask a couple 

of clarifying questions to help our members understand what our 

next steps are. 

Republicans have announced that they plan to establish a new 

select subcommittee—and I don’t know how much you know about 

all this, but I’ve got to ask—to take over this investigation. The 

question is, will that subcommittee have jurisdiction going forward, 

or will the Oversight Committee continue this investigation of 

Planned Parenthood? Do you know? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. It’s the intention of the committee to continue to pursue the duly issued subpoena and obtaining all the videos. 

According to the information I have from the Speaker, the body 

will consider a bill—I think it’s a bill; maybe it’s under a different 

structure—next week for the formation of this select panel. It may 

be empowered with subpoena authority. We’re not sure, haven’t 

seen that yet. But the Speaker indicated this morning that that 

will come before the body next week. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Now, as we both know, when the Benghazi Select Committee was created, all of the standing committees had to 

turn over all of their records to the select committee. Is that what 

we are going to do? Is that consistent with what you know so far? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I don’t know. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. All right. 

And do you know whether this new select committee—subcommittee will be given additional taxpayer funding to pay to investigate the Planned Parenthood? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. I don’t know the structure, I don’t know 

the length, I don’t know the powers, and I don’t know the funding. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And my last question—and I was unclear on 

your response to a question on this earlier. Do you plan to invite 

Mr. Daleiden to testify? And if so, when do you plan to do that, if 

so? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. We need to, A, clarify the disposition of 

these videos. Given that there’s a temporary restraining order, we 

need to have that loosened up. When we obtain all of those videos, 

we’ll work in partnership with you and develop a plan on how to 

deal with those. 

I don’t know what the structure of this new select committee, 

how that affects it, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
105 

The first step is to obtain all the videos, and I’m glad to see you 

agree with us. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yes, definitely. 

The reason that I’m asking is because all of the Democrats on 

this committee have requested a minority day of hearings with Mr. 

Daleiden under the House rules. If our committee is going to yield 

to the new select subcommittee, then we may consider withdrawing 

our request. But if our committee is going to continue in addition 

to the select subcommittee, then we may very well insist on our 

rights to have Mr. Daleiden testify. 

Can you shed any light on this? 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Again, the first step is getting all the videos, and, at that point, we’ll make a determination. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. To reserve our rights, I’m going to submit our 

September 21 letter for the record requesting a minority day of 

hearings. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. But I look forward to talking with you further 

about this issue, as we’ve been working together extremely well. 

But I want to make sure I protect our members’ rights. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Very good. I appreciate it. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. And last but not least, again, Ms. Richards, I 

want to thank you for your cooperation. You have been extremely 

cooperative. We have not always had that. You got a lot of compliments from up here about the cooperation you have provided, 

and we really do appreciate it. 

And, on behalf of so many women, people like my mother-in-law 

and so many others, I want to thank you. Because I know of so 

many women who, if it were not for Planned Parenthood, would be 

in a terrible way. And so thank you very much. 

Ms. RICHARDS. Thank you. 

Chairman CHAFFETZ. Ms. Richards, again, thank you for your 

participation here today. You’ve been very generous with your time. 

I think you’ve honestly tried to share your thoughts and perspectives. 

I know it’s hard and a long day, but we do appreciate your willingness to voluntarily come, provide your testimony in advance, all 

the things that we look for. We do appreciate that. 

With that, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(107) 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
108 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 26029.006
109 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 26029.007
110 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 26029.008
111 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 26029.009
112 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 26029.010
113 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 26029.011
114 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 26029.012
115 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 26029.013
116 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 26029.014
117 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 26029.015
118 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 26029.016
119 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 26029.017
120 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 26029.018
121 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 26029.019
122 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 26029.020
123 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 26029.021
124 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 26029.022
125 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 26029.023
126 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 26029.024
127 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 26029.025
128 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 26029.026
129 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 26029.027
130 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 26029.028
131 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 26029.029
132 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 26029.030
133 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 26029.031
134 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 26029.032
135 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 26029.033
136 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 26029.034
137 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 26029.035
138 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 26029.036
139 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 37 here 26029.037
140 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 38 here 26029.038
141 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 39 here 26029.039
142 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 40 here 26029.040
143 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 41 here 26029.041
144 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 42 here 26029.042
145 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 43 here 26029.043
146 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 44 here 26029.044
147 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 45 here 26029.045
148 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 46 here 26029.046