I 
116TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2975 
To protect a woman’s ability to determine whether and when to bear a 
child or end a pregnancy, and to protect a health care provider’s ability 
to provide reproductive health care services, including abortion services. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 23, 2019 
Ms. JUDY CHU of California (for herself, Mr. VELA, Ms. VELA´ZQUEZ, Ms. 
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. WELCH, Ms. 
WEXTON, Ms. WILD, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. 
LOEBSACK, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. YARMUTH, Mr. 
EVANS, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, Mrs. 
BUSTOS, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, Mr. NEGUSE, Mr. ALLRED, Ms. ADAMS, 
Mr. AGUILAR, Ms. BARRAGA´N, Ms. BASS, Mrs. BEATTY, Mr. BERA, Mr. 
BEYER, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER, Ms. BONAMICI, Mr. 
BROWN of Maryland, Ms. BROWNLEY of California, Mr. CARBAJAL, Mr. 
CA´RDENAS, Mr. CARSON of Indiana, Mr. CASTEN of Illinois, Ms. CASTOR 
of Florida, Mr. CISNEROS, Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts, Ms. CLARKE of 
New York, Mr. CLAY, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. COOPER, Mr. 
COX of California, Mr. CRIST, Mr. CROW, Mr. SUOZZI, Mr. CUMMINGS, 
Mr. MORELLE, Mrs. DAVIS of California, Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illi-
nois, Ms. DEAN, Mr. DEFAZIO, Ms. DEGETTE, Ms. DELAURO, Ms. 
DELBENE, Mr. DELGADO, Mrs. DEMINGS, Mr. DEUTCH, Mrs. DINGELL, 
Mr. DOGGETT, Mr. ENGEL, Ms. ESCOBAR, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. 
FLETCHER, Mr. FOSTER, Ms. FRANKEL, Ms. FUDGE, Ms. GARCIA of 
Texas, Ms. SCANLON, Mr. GOMEZ, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. GRIJALVA, 
Ms. HAALAND, Mr. HASTINGS, Mrs. HAYES, Mr. HECK, Mr. HIGGINS of 
New York, Ms. HILL of California, Mr. HIMES, Ms. NORTON, Mr. 
HORSFORD, Ms. HOULAHAN, Ms. JACKSON LEE, Ms. JAYAPAL, Mr. 
JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms. JOHNSON of Texas, Ms. KAPTUR, Ms. KELLY 
of Illinois, Mr. KHANNA, Mr. KILMER, Mr. KIND, Mrs. KIRKPATRICK, 
Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI, Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire, Mr. LARSEN of 
Washington, Mrs. LAWRENCE, Mr. LAWSON of Florida, Ms. LEE of Cali-
fornia, Mrs. LEE of Nevada, Mr. LEVIN of Michigan, Mr. LEWIS, Mr. 
TED LIEU of California, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. LOWENTHAL, Mrs. LOWEY, 
Mr. LUJA´N, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mr. SEAN PAT-
RICK MALONEY of New York, Ms. MATSUI, Mrs. MCBATH, Ms. MCCOL-
LUM, Mr. MCEACHIN, Mr. MEEKS, Ms. MENG, Ms. MOORE, Mr. 
MOULTON, Ms. MUCARSEL-POWELL, Mr. NADLER, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6652
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Mr. O’HALLERAN, Ms. OMAR, Mr. PANETTA, Mr. PAPPAS, Mr. PAYNE, 
Mr. PERLMUTTER, Mr. PETERS, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. POCAN, Ms. 
PRESSLEY, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. QUIGLEY, Mr. RASKIN, 
Miss RICE of New York, Mr. RICHMOND, Mr. ROUDA, Mr. RUPPERS-
BERGER, Ms. SA´NCHEZ, Mr. SARBANES, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCHIFF, 
Mr. SCHNEIDER, Mr. SCHRADER, Ms. SCHRIER, Mr. SERRANO, Ms. 
SHALALA, Mr. SIRES, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. SOTO, Ms. SPEIER, 
Mr. SWALWELL of California, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. THOMPSON of California, 
Ms. TITUS, Mr. TRONE, Ms. TLAIB, Mr. TONKO, Mrs. TORRES of Cali-
fornia, Mrs. TRAHAN, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mr. MCGOVERN, 
Ms. PORTER, Mr. CASE, Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ, Mr. CICILLINE, Mr. 
GALLEGO, Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania, Mr. GARCI´A of Illi-
nois, Ms. SHERRILL, Mr. DAVID
SCOTT
of Georgia, and Mr. 
DESAULNIER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce 
A BILL 
To protect a woman’s ability to determine whether and when 
to bear a child or end a pregnancy, and to protect 
a health care provider’s ability to provide reproductive 
health care services, including abortion services. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Women’s Health Pro-
tection Act of 2019’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Access to safe, legal abortion services is es-
sential to women’s health and central to women’s 
ability to participate equally in the economic and so-
cial life of the United States. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(2) Since 1973, the Supreme Court repeatedly 
has recognized the constitutional right of a woman 
to decide to terminate her pregnancy before fetal vi-
ability, and to terminate her pregnancy after fetal 
viability where it is necessary, in the good-faith med-
ical judgment of the treating health care profes-
sional, for the preservation of her life or health. 
(3) Nonetheless, access to safe, legal abortion 
services has been hindered across the United States 
in various ways, including blockades of health care 
facilities and associated violence, prohibitions of and 
restrictions on insurance coverage, restrictions which 
shame and stigmatize women seeking abortion serv-
ices, and medically unnecessary regulations which 
neither confer any health benefit nor further the 
safety of abortion services, but which harm women 
by delaying access to, and reducing the availability 
of, services. Since 2010, States and local govern-
ments have passed more than 400 such restrictions 
singling out health care providers who offer abortion 
services and interfering with health care providers’ 
ability to provide reproductive health care services 
and the ability of patients to obtain those services. 
(4) Many State and local governments have im-
posed restrictions on the provision of abortion that 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
are neither evidence-based nor generally applicable 
to the medical profession or to other medically com-
parable outpatient gynecological procedures, such as 
endometrial ablations, dilation and curettage for rea-
sons other than abortion, hysteroscopies, loop 
electrosurgical excision procedures, or other analo-
gous non-gynecological procedures performed in 
similar outpatient settings including vasectomy, 
sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. 
(5) Legal abortion is one of the safest medical 
procedures in the United States. An independent re-
view of research on the safety and quality of abor-
tion services in the United States, published by the 
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and 
Medicine in 2018, found that abortion in all forms 
is safe and effective and that the biggest threats to 
the quality of abortion services in the United States 
are State regulations that create barriers to care. 
These abortion-specific restrictions conflict with 
medical standards and are not supported by the rec-
ommendations and guidelines issued by leading re-
productive health care professional organizations in-
cluding the American College of Obstetricians and 
Gynecologists, the Society of Family Planning, the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
National Abortion Federation, the World Health Or-
ganization, and others. 
(6) Many abortion-specific restrictions do not 
confer any health or safety benefits on the patient. 
Instead, these restrictions have the purpose and ef-
fect of unduly burdening women’s personal and pri-
vate medical decisions to end their pregnancies by 
making access to abortion services more difficult, 
invasive, and costly, forcing women to travel signifi-
cant distances and make multiple unnecessary visits 
to the provider, and in some cases, foreclosing the 
option altogether. For example, a 2018 report from 
the University of California San Francisco’s Advanc-
ing New Standards in Reproductive Health research 
group found that in 27 cities across the United 
States, people have to travel more than 100 miles in 
any direction to reach an abortion provider. 
(7) These restrictions additionally harm wom-
en’s health by reducing access not only to abortion 
services but also to the other essential health care 
services offered by the providers targeted by the re-
strictions, including— 
(A) contraceptive services, which advance 
women’s health and provide a range of benefits, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
including preventing unintended pregnancies 
and reducing the need for abortion; and 
(B) screenings for cervical cancer and sex-
ually transmitted infections. 
(8) The cumulative effect of these numerous re-
strictions has been to severely limit the availability 
of abortion services in some areas, creating a patch-
work system where access to abortion services is 
more available in some States than in others. A 
2019 report from the Government Accountability Of-
fice examining State Medicaid compliance with abor-
tion coverage requirements analyzed 7 key chal-
lenges (identified both by health care providers and 
research literature) and their effect on abortion ac-
cess, and found that access to abortion services var-
ied across the States and even within a State. 
(9) The harms of these abortion-specific restric-
tions fall especially heavily on low-income women, 
women of color, immigrants, young people, and 
women living in rural and other medically under-
served areas. 
(10) Abortion-specific restrictions single out 
health services used by women, and rely on and rein-
force stereotypes about women’s roles, women’s deci-
sionmaking, and women’s need for protection. These 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
restrictions harm the basic autonomy, dignity, equal-
ity, and ability of women to participate in the social 
and economic life of the Nation. 
(11) Not all people who become pregnant or 
need abortion services identify as women. Access to 
abortion services is critical to the health of every 
person regardless of actual or perceived race, color, 
national origin, immigration status, sex (including 
gender identity, sex stereotyping, or sexual orienta-
tion), age, or disability status. This Act’s protection 
is inclusive of all pregnant people. 
(12) These restrictions affect the cost and 
availability of abortion services, and the settings in 
which abortion services are delivered. Women travel 
across State lines and otherwise engage in interstate 
commerce to access this important medical care, and 
more would be forced to do so absent this Act. Like-
wise, health care providers travel across State lines 
and otherwise engage in interstate commerce in 
order to provide reproductive health services to pa-
tients, and more would be forced to do so absent this 
Act. 
(13) Health care providers, including those who 
provide abortion services, engage in a form of eco-
nomic and commercial activity when they provide 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
abortion services, and there is an interstate market 
for abortion services. 
(14) To provide abortion services, health care 
providers engage in interstate commerce to purchase 
medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary 
goods and services. To provide and assist others in 
providing abortion services, health care providers en-
gage in interstate commerce to obtain and provide 
training. To provide abortion services, health care 
providers employ and obtain commercial services 
from doctors, nurses, and other personnel who en-
gage in interstate commerce and travel across State 
lines. Abortion restrictions substantially affect inter-
state commerce in numerous ways. 
(15) It is difficult and time-consuming for clin-
ics to challenge State laws that burden or impede 
abortion services. Litigation that blocks one abortion 
restriction may not prevent a State from adopting 
other abortion restrictions or using different meth-
ods to burden or impede abortion services. There is 
a history and pattern of States passing successive 
and different laws that impede and unduly burden 
abortion services. 
(16) When a health care provider ceases pro-
viding abortion services as a result of burdensome 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
and medically unnecessary regulations, it is often 
difficult or impossible for that health care provider 
to recommence providing those abortion services, 
and difficult or impossible for other health care pro-
viders to provide abortion services that restore or re-
place the ceased abortion services. 
(17) An overwhelming majority of abortions in 
the United States are provided in clinics, not hos-
pitals. The large majority of United States counties 
have no clinics that provide abortion. 
(18) Congress has the authority to enact this 
Act to protect abortion services pursuant to— 
(A) its powers under the commerce clause 
of section 8 of article I of the Constitution of 
the United States; 
(B) its powers under section 5 of the Four-
teenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States to enforce the provisions of sec-
tion 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment; and 
(C) its powers under the necessary and 
proper clause of section 8 of Article I of the 
Constitution of the United States. 
(19) Congress has used its authority in the past 
to protect women’s ability to access abortion services 
and health care providers’ ability to provide abortion 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
services. In the early 1990s, protests and blockades 
at health care facilities where abortion services were 
provided, and associated violence, increased dramati-
cally and reached crisis level, requiring Congres-
sional action. Congress passed the Freedom of Ac-
cess to Clinic Entrances Act (Public Law 103–259; 
108 Stat. 694) to address that situation and protect 
physical access to abortion services. 
(20) Congressional action is necessary to put an 
end to harmful restrictions, to federally protect ac-
cess to abortion services for all women regardless of 
where they live, and to protect the ability of repro-
ductive health care providers to provide these serv-
ices in a safe and accessible manner. 
(b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this Act— 
(1) to permit health care providers to provide 
abortion services without limitations or requirements 
that single out the provision of abortion services for 
restrictions that are more burdensome than those re-
strictions imposed on medically comparable proce-
dures, do not significantly advance women’s health 
or the safety of abortion services, and make abortion 
services more difficult to access; 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(2) to promote women’s health and women’s 
ability to participate equally in the economic and so-
cial life of the United States; and 
(3) to invoke Congressional authority, including 
the powers of Congress under the commerce clause 
of section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the 
United States, its powers under section 5 of the 
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States to enforce the provisions of section 1 
of the Fourteenth Amendment, and its powers under 
the necessary and proper clause of section 8 of arti-
cle I of the Constitution of the United States. 
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 
In this Act: 
(1) ABORTION SERVICES.—The term ‘‘abortion 
services’’ means an abortion and any medical or 
non-medical services related to and provided in con-
junction with an abortion (whether or not provided 
at the same time or on the same day as the abor-
tion). 
(2) HEALTH
CARE
PROVIDER.—The term 
‘‘health care provider’’ means any entity or indi-
vidual (including any physician, certified nurse-mid-
wife, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant) 
that is— 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(A) engaged in the delivery of health care 
services, including abortion services; and 
(B) if required by law or regulation to be 
licensed or certified to engage in the delivery of 
such services, is so licensed or certified. 
(3) MEDICALLY COMPARABLE PROCEDURES.— 
The term ‘‘medically comparable procedures’’ means 
medical procedures that are similar in terms of 
health and safety risks to the patient, complexity, or 
the clinical setting that is indicated. 
(4) PREGNANCY.—The term ‘‘pregnancy’’ refers 
to the period of the human reproductive process be-
ginning with the implantation of a fertilized egg. 
(5) VIABILITY.—The term ‘‘viability’’ means 
the point in a pregnancy at which, in the good-faith 
medical judgment of the treating health care pro-
vider, based on the particular facts of the case be-
fore the health care provider, there is a reasonable 
likelihood of sustained fetal survival outside the 
uterus with or without artificial support. 
SEC. 4. PERMITTED SERVICES. 
(a) GENERAL RULE.—A health care provider has a 
statutory right under this Act to provide abortion services, 
and may provide abortion services, and that provider’s pa-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
tient has a corresponding right to receive such services, 
without any of the following limitations or requirements: 
(1) A requirement that a health care provider 
perform specific tests or medical procedures in con-
nection with the provision of abortion services, un-
less generally required for the provision of medically 
comparable procedures. 
(2) A requirement that the same health care 
provider who provides abortion services also perform 
specified tests, services, or procedures prior to or 
subsequent to the abortion. 
(3) A requirement that a health care provider 
offer or provide the patient seeking abortion services 
medically inaccurate information in advance of or 
during abortion services. 
(4) A limitation on a health care provider’s abil-
ity to prescribe or dispense drugs based on current 
evidence-based regimens or the provider’s good-faith 
medical judgment, other than a limitation generally 
applicable to the medical profession. 
(5) A limitation on a health care provider’s abil-
ity to provide abortion services via telemedicine, 
other than a limitation generally applicable to the 
provision of medical services via telemedicine. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(6) A requirement or limitation concerning the 
physical plant, equipment, staffing, or hospital 
transfer arrangements of facilities where abortion 
services are provided, or the credentials or hospital 
privileges or status of personnel at such facilities, 
that is not imposed on facilities or the personnel of 
facilities where medically comparable procedures are 
performed. 
(7) A requirement that, prior to obtaining an 
abortion, a patient make one or more medically un-
necessary in-person visits to the provider of abortion 
services or to any individual or entity that does not 
provide abortion services. 
(8) A prohibition on abortion prior to fetal via-
bility, including a prohibition or restriction on a par-
ticular abortion procedure. 
(9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viabil-
ity when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the 
treating health care provider, continuation of the 
pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant pa-
tient’s life or health. 
(10) A limitation on a health care provider’s 
ability to provide immediate abortion services when 
that health care provider believes, based on the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
good-faith medical judgment of the provider, that 
delay would pose a risk to the patient’s health. 
(11) A requirement that a patient seeking abor-
tion services prior to fetal viability state the pa-
tient’s reasons for seeking abortion services, or a 
limitation on the provision of abortion services prior 
to fetal viability based on the patient’s reasons or 
perceived reasons for obtaining abortion services. 
(b) OTHER LIMITATIONS
OR REQUIREMENTS.—A 
health care provider has a statutory right to provide abor-
tion services, and may provide abortion services, and that 
provider’s patient has a corresponding right to receive 
such services, without a limitation or requirement that— 
(1) is the same as or similar to one or more of 
the limitations or requirements described in sub-
section (a); or 
(2) both— 
(A) singles out the provision of abortion 
services, health care providers who provide 
abortion services, or facilities in which abortion 
services are provided; and 
(B) impedes access to abortion services 
based on one or more of the factors described 
in subsection (c). 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(c) FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION.—Factors for a 
court to consider in determining whether a limitation or 
requirement impedes access to abortion services for pur-
poses of subsection (b)(2)(B) include the following: 
(1) Whether the limitation or requirement 
interferes with a health care provider’s ability to 
provide care and render services in accordance with 
the provider’s good-faith medical judgment. 
(2) Whether the limitation or requirement is 
reasonably likely to delay some patients in accessing 
abortion services. 
(3) Whether the limitation or requirement is 
reasonably likely to directly or indirectly increase the 
cost of providing abortion services or the cost for ob-
taining abortion services (including costs associated 
with travel, childcare, or time off work). 
(4) Whether the limitation or requirement is 
reasonably likely to have the effect of necessitating 
a trip to the offices of a health care provider that 
would not otherwise be required. 
(5) Whether the limitation or requirement is 
reasonably likely to result in a decrease in the avail-
ability of abortion services in a given State or geo-
graphic region. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
(6) Whether the limitation or requirement im-
poses penalties that are not imposed on other health 
care providers for comparable conduct or failure to 
act, or that are more severe than penalties imposed 
on other health care providers for comparable con-
duct or failure to act. 
(7) The cumulative impact of the limitation or 
requirement combined with other new or existing 
limitations or requirements. 
(d) EXCEPTION.—To defend against a claim that a 
limitation or requirement violates a health care provider’s 
or patient’s statutory rights under subsection (b), a party 
must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that— 
(1) the limitation or requirement significantly 
advances the safety of abortion services or the health 
of patients; and 
(2) the safety of abortion services or the health 
of patients cannot be advanced by a less restrictive 
alternative measure or action. 
(e) APPLICABILITY.— 
(1) GENERAL
RELATIONSHIP
TO
FEDERAL 
LAW.—Except as stated in paragraph (2), this Act 
supersedes and applies to all Federal law, and the 
implementation of that law, whether statutory or 
otherwise, and whether adopted before or after the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
03:29 Jun 07, 2019
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2975.IH
H2975
pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS