Providing for Consideration of H.R. Colorado Wilderness Act of Providing for Consideration of H.J. Res. Removing Deadline for Ratification of Equal Rights Amendment; and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. WAGNER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to oppose H.J. Res. 79. This resolution seeks to unconstitutionally remove the deadline for ratification of the equal rights amendment.

In 1972, Madam Speaker, when I was 10 years old, Congress originally set the deadline for ratification at 7 years by two-thirds vote. Before the original time period expired, Congress then passed a 3-year extension, which also passed before the necessary number of States ratified the amendment.

Today, 37 years after the constitutional time has expired, it is quite clear that, because of a new focus on a so-called right to taxpayer-funded abortion, the equal rights amendment does not have support from a two-thirds majority of Congress or, likely, from two- thirds of the States, certainly, as we have seen at least five States have already rescinded.

Instead of following the guidance of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg and starting the amendment process over again as the Founders intended--and this is, let me just say, Madam Speaker, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg's legal view as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. It is her legal view. It is her constitutional view. Instead, Democrats are attempting, today, to retroactively and unconstitutionally remove this deadline by a simple majority vote.

For decades, Congress has expressed the will of the American people and not used taxpayer dollars for abortion. Whether they were Democrat or Republican Presidents, split Chambers of Congress or one party in control of both branches of government, there has been bipartisan agreement on appropriations language to limit taxpayer-funded abortions and support basic pro-life protections across our country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. WAGNER. Madam Speaker, if the Democrat majority wants to test that bipartisan agreement and upend decades of precedent, they are welcome to use the simple, clear process laid out in Article V of the Constitution to propose and adopt a new and legal ERA amendment.

Let me be clear, Madam Speaker. I support equal rights for women, as does the U.S. Constitution, but skirting that process for partisan gain sets a dangerous and un-American precedent.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to protect our democracy and to vote ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source