to fill the void. if we don't continue this life-saving service, women will be denied health care across this great nation. this continued assault on constitutionally protected reproductive freedoms 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 healthcare, mammogram, 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

health care decisions. and i might add that planned parenthood polls four times stronger than congress. i might add, we should be investigating this group that did fraudulent, edited tapes and not a distinguished health care providing health life-saving 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 publically 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 health care

reproductive health care services to american women and men. >> i will hold the record open for five legislative days for any members who would like to submit a written statement. we have had wide interest from a number of our colleagues from broader house membership. i would ask unanimous consent that congresswoman sheila jackson lee of texas, congresswoman black of continue ten 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 would be happy to waive them in as well. without objection, so ordered. we will now recognize our witness. pleased to welcome ms. cecile richards. per suant to committee rules all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. if you will rise and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the

truth? thank you. let the record reflect the witness answered in the affirmative. in order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate it if you would limit your testimony to five minutes, and your entire written statement will be made part of the record. mrs. richards, you are now recognized for five minutes. >> 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 center, and they trust us because our rigorous health care standards have been developed with the nation's top medical experts over our 99-year history. there's been a great deal of misinformation circulated about planned parenthood recently. i want to be absolutely clear at the outset. the federal funding that planned parenthood receives allows our

doctors and clinicians to provide birth control, cancer screenings and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. 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, the victim of incest or when her life is in danger. we operate like other health centers and hospitals that provide medical care to medicaid patients. medicaid reimburses us for the health services that we provide. the department of health and human services conducts routine audits of the medicaid program to ensure these funds are used appropriately. the same is true for the title ten, the federal family planning program, which was signed into

law by president richard nixon. planned parenthood has been in the news because of deceptively edited videos released by a group dedicated to making abortion illegal. 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 life saving medical research is legal according to the 1993 law passed by the senate 93-4. based on recommendations from a blue ribbon panel that was created under the reagan administration. second, currently less than 1% of planned parenthood health

centers are facilitating the donation of tissue for fetal tissue research. third, in those health centers, donating fetal tissue is something that many of our parents want to do and regularly request. finally, planned parenthood policies not only comply with but 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. 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. is it unacceptable that women 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 health care 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. as a result of better sex education and more access to birth control, we are at a 40-year low for teen pregnancy in the united states.

for all the progress we have made, there is much still to do. for many american women, planned parenthood is the only health care provider they will see this year. it is impossible for our patients to understand why congress is once again threatening their ability to go to the health care provider of their choice. two weeks ago, i was in plano, texas, with one of these patients. she can't be here today because she has a new job and she's supporting her family. but if she were here, she 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, dana found a lump in her breast. the only two clinics that would take a patient without health insurance couldn't see her for at least two months. so dana came to planned

parenthood for a breast exam. there our clinician of 21 years vivian guided her through the process of follow-ups and referrals and helped make sure that her treatment was covered. she called dana repeatedly to check on her as she entered treatment. and i am really happy to say today that dana is now cancer free. mr. chairman, i wish this congress would spend more time hearing from women like dana. 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. so i want to thank you to be here today and opportunity to testify on behalf of dana and the 2.7 million patients who rely on planned parenthood for high quality essential health care every year. thank you.

>> thank you. i now recognize myself for five minutes. ms. richards, planned parenthood has sent 32-plus million dollars in grants overseas. does any of the funds go to the democratic republican of the congo? >> congressman, let me -- >> no, no, no. we don't have time for a big narrative. >> you asked me a question. any of the money that is -- planned parenthood raises and is given by foundations and individuals to support family planning services is in africa and latin america and they go to individual organizations. i'm happy to provide you a list of those organizations. i did not bring them with me. >> if could you give us a list. does planned parenthood have any ownership in foreign companies? >> i don't believe so. i don't know what you mean by ownership. >> in your 2013 tax return it lists $3.3 million marked as "investment" in central america and the caribbean. i'm asking if that was an actual investment. >> we don't own anything in those countries.

>> okay. >> let me keep going. i have to keep going. i would appreciate a list. you have been very cooperative so far. >> we have been extremely cooperative. >> 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? >> i don't have the figures with me. >> it was. congratulations. in 2013, your compensation went up some $240,000. your compensation we're showing based on tax returns is $590,000. >> that's not my annual compensati compensation. my annual compensation is $520,000 a year. i believe there was a program that the board sort of put together for a three-year -- again, i think we have been extremely forthcoming with all of our documents. >> let me go to the next one. >> will the gentleman yield? >> no.

planned parenthood and its lobbying arm, planned parenthood action fund controls two 527 organizations that have their own political activities. planned parenthood votes and action fund pac. do they receive money to conduct these activities? >> the planned parenthood action fund is a totally separate corporation. receives no federal dollars whatsoever. >> what about the management? who manages it? do you manage it? >> it's managed by a team of people who are employed by the planned parenthood action fund. >> do you manage? >> i don't directly manage it. >> do you help manage it? >> some of my time is allocated to it. but i do not oversee -- >> in 2013, you were listed as a shared employee. you were compensated with $31,000 to help run that organization, correct? >> you asked me -- sir, you asked me if i ran the organization. some of my time --

>> do you help run it? >> 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. >> you also involved in the planned parenthood action fund. if you could help us understand what the duties are for your $31,000 of contribution. my guess is you run 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? >> the planned parenthood action fund is a separate organization that has its own board and own fund-raising and no federal employees -- >> shared assets. shared lists. shared e-mails, assets. this is the concern. tell me about -- >> could i -- i want to make sure you understood my statements as i know we're talking about federal funds. zero federal funds are related to the -- >> it's the co-mingling that bothers us.

every dollar that you get in a federal from federal dollars means you don't necessarily have to allocate it for these particular assets. 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. >> i'm not familiar with that exact payment. >> you gave them $200,000. if you don't know -- you are running this organization. hold on. hold on. let me list out what their goal is. their mantra is, envision a future where progressives use ballot measures as a political and civic engagement tool for victory. you gave them $200,000. >> i run an organization that has a budget of $200 million. when you pull out one figure out of the last five years, i'm trying to be responsive. it's important to -- perhaps you are not aware 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. we've absolutely been involved in ballot initiative measures that have been introduced by people who want to restrict women's health care. >> you don't need federal dollars to do this. >> i don't to do that. >> you do to run the organization. planned parenthood has given planned parenthood action fund more $22 million to exercise -- involved in their lobbying expenditures and their advocacy efforts. >> none of the dollars that you are discussing are federal dollars. the planned parenthood federation of america receives almost no federal dollars. at this point only $21,000 for clinical trial network for birth control. >> it goes to the same organization and you just separate it all out. >> we are highly accountable. >> i have gone over time.

i need to show this last slide. this one i don't understand. in the case of dana, when she came to planned parenthood, did she get a mammogram? >> no. she was referred for a mammogram. >> that's part of the challenge is that you don't do mammograms. if you -- >> i'm sorry. >> you don't do mammograms, correct? >> if you would give me one moment to explain. planned parenthood is a woman's health center like where i go for my breast exams every year. if you need a mammogram, you are referred to a radiological center and that's how women actually receive their care. we provide breast exams to -- i could 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 -- again, you created the slide. i have no idea what it is. >> 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. that's what's going on in your organization. >> this is a slide that has never been shown to me before.

i'm happy to look at it and -- it does not reflect what's happening at planned parenthood. >> you are going to deny that we take those numbers -- >> i'm going to deny the slide you showed me that no one provided us before. we provided you all the information about everything -- all the services that planned parenthood provides. it doesn't feel like we're trying to get to the truth. you just showed me this. i'm happy to look at it. >> i pulled those numbers out of the -- >> the source is americans united for life which san anti-abortion group. so i would check your source. >> we will get to the bottom of the truth of that. we will now recognize mr. cummings for a generous seven minutes. >> i thought it was eight. i think it's eight. thank you very much. ms. richards, i often hear women, including my wife, talk about the way women are treated as opposed to men. not being a woman, i try to be

sensitive. i want to just -- the chairman gave you a series of questions. i have a few other ones. i find it extremely hypocritical that the republicans criticize 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, jp morgan and citicorp and other major banks pled guilty to manipulating markets and interest rates. they were fined more than $5 billion for their actions. yet citigroup ceo received $13 million last year and jpmorgan's ceo received $20 million. these banks get extensive federal support in the form of borrowing through the

federal reserve discount window and access to the fdic. do you know if house republicans make any effort to strip the banks of their federal support? >> i'm unaware. >> well, i can tell you they didn't. johnson & johnson was fined $2 million 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? >> i do not. >> i can answer that for you, no, they didn't. and they 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? >> it sounds like there hasn't been. >> 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 tax breaks. but when it comes to women's health -- when it comes to women's health, the

republicans' approach is 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. the political theater continues. this whole defunding fight is just a pretext for the 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 the same attacks on women's health. let me go on. ms. richards, again, i want to thank you for being here. republicans accuse planned parenthood of selling tissue from abortions for profit. federal law explicitly allows

for the reimbursement of reasonable expenses for tissue samples. republicans say that mr. deliden's videos are proof that planned parenthood was making a profit. do you know who dr. nucatola. >> yes. >> who is it? >> she works in our medical division. >> i was going to show some clips but our friend had some problems with it. i want to do quotes from some of the stuff mr. daliden left on the cutting floor when he was doing his -- working with the tapes. dr. deborah nucatola said no one -- to them, this is not a service they should be making money for. that was left on the floor. she also said no one is going to see this as a money-making

thing. 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 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 and do good for the medical community and still maintain access at the end of the day, end of quote. she went on to say -- the other piece on the cutting room floor, on the floor are there affiliates that would just donate the tissue for free or -- and then there is another one. i'll just end with this one. dr. nucatola said, i mean, really, the guidance is, this is not something we should be making an exorbitant amount of

money on, so -- so let me ask you this. ms. richards, i cannot imagine a more clearer answer than these. as far as i can dr. daeleiden and his group spent the better part of three 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 one tissue sale sample at a price above reasonable expenses that are allowed under law. but nobody, nobody has identified a single, a single incident where that occurred. is that right ms. richards? >> that's correct. >> it's amazing how hard mr. deliden and his group tried to get your affiliates to accept more than reasonable expenses. over and over again they press,

they push, they cajole, but they never succeeded. so after they fail in the three-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, my final question, as i run out of time, in the clips that i just talked about, dr. nucatola was not aware she was being secretly recorded. do you know whether that is accurate or not? >> that's completely accurate. >> she was sharing that planned parenthood does not seek to make money in fetal tissue. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> 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? >> there aren't any planned parenthood clinics, i believe. not any have mammogram facilima at their facility. >> and how many clinics are there? >> 650 and 700 on any given day. >> okay. so none, to your knowledge, have a mammogram machine. >> right. we have different kinds of arrangements with -- depending on the state, to refer women for mammograms. as i said earlier, the question to the chairman -- >> what surgical services does planned parenthood provide? surgical services? >> well, we provide surgical abortions. we provide colposcopy. we do a variety of sources.

we have courses across the country. but some planned parenthoods provide broader services, some primary care, et cetera. >> i was just asking about surgical services with that question. so abortion is included in surgical services. but i want to find out where you get your 3% figure that you cite for abortion procedures. that's yourself self-reported abortion statistic. >> it is 3% of all the procedures we provide. all the services we provide. >> okay. well, let's talk about planned parenthood revenue from abortions. if you look at the 2013 statistics that you report, abortions from -- from revenue would have been over 86% of your nongovernment revenue. how do you explain this massive

disparity between the amount of revenue you collect from abortion and the fact that you only report 3% of your services being abortion? >> well, i think there's two questions you sort of mixed in there. let me try to address both. one is, as we already stated, federal money does not go for abortions. so the federal portion is reimbursement for preventive care services. i think the other -- so that's why they are -- those numbers aren't connected. >> can you tell me how many of your affiliates receive the majority of their revenue from abortion? >> i don't know that answer. >> could you get it for me? >> i'll talk to my team. >> thanks. >> but i do think it's important to understand that abortion procedures are probably more expensive than some other procedures that we provide. which might explain what you are trying to get at.

>> 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? >> well, we're an organization in 50 states. we, as the chairman has noted, we have programs in latin america and in africa where we support family planning programs. and i think we have provided very detailed information, thousands of pages of financial statements, audited financials, our annual report. if there's anything we need to break down further, i'm happy to do that. but i would say that, again -- >> i would very much appreciate it if you would break it down. because the taxpayers are

funding over 40% of planned parenthood. and my point is they just have a right to know how this money is being spent. >> absolutely. >> and if taxpayer dollars are being used to free up services that you provide that are abhorrent services in the view of many taxpayers. there are alternatives in this country. many, many, 13,000 clinics that cater specifically to women's health. >> congresswoman, i would like to address this. one of the comments made earlier, and i wasn't able to respond, we don't get a federal subsidy. it is important to understand -- >> can you function -- >> -- how the medicaid -- >> could you function on nonfederal dollars? why do you need federal dollars?

you're making a ton of dough. >> we don't make any profit off federal money. if i could just have a moment to explain. >> but you are using -- >> 1.6 million -- >> displacing money that could go to the 13,000 health care clinics. my time is up. i yield back. >> could i answer the question? i'm not sure exactly what the whole question was. but i do think it is really important to understand that 60% of our patients are receiving -- they are either medicaid patients or title 10 patients. 78% live at 150% of poverty or below. for many of them, it is the only family planning provider that will see them in their area. half of our centers are in medically underserved communities. we don't just get a big check from the federal government. we, like other medicaid providers, are reimbursed

directly for services provided. >> mr. chairman, thank you for allowing ms. richards to answer the question. >> as a point of clarification, ms. richards, i want to make sure there is no ambiguity here. the gentle woman from wyoming asked where the majority of revenue comes from abortion services. will you actually provide us that list? >> 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, audited financial statements. i will talk to my team and we will do everything we can -- >> for the record, you have been very cooperative. i just want to keep that rolling. you were very good at agreeing to give bits of information. why not this part? >> i don't want to commit to anything that i don't have. i said i will work with you and your team. we have no -- >> if you have it, will you give it to us? if you have it, will you give it to us? >> i don't have it.

so i'm just saying to you, i will work with my team and we will work with your staff to provide any and all information we can. >> i would hope that would include the request from the congresswoman from wyoming as well. i now recognize the gentlewoman from new york, ms. maloney, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, i 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. the entire time i've been in congress, i've never seen a witness beaten up and questioned about their salary. ms. richards heads a distinguished organization providing health care services to millions of americans. 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. 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? >> i am. i look forward to changing into pink as soon as these proceedings are finished today. >> 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 health

care services of planned parenthood? >> i'm glad to hear that. again, we're pleased to provide services to anyone who walks in the door. one of the things i think that is important and refers a little bit to the question earlier is that 60% 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 need birth control. for some of them they haven't had an annual exam in many, many years. we are proud to serve them with high quality care when they need it. >> are you aware this hearing today is promoted by a series of deceptively edited and purposefully misleading videos that have been found to be deceptively edited by leading fact-checking organizations in this country, including five states. five states have their own individual investigations. now six. missouri did their own review.

and they found they are complying, that planned parenthood is complying with all state laws regarding tissue donations. 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? >> i'm not aware of any, but there may be. >> what about a tax on title 10? >> well, i think it has been concerning not only are we seeing in this country efforts to ending access to safe and legal right of abortion, but reductions in support for family planning are equally disturbing. i'm encouraged that finally we are beginning to see some breakthrough. as i said earlier, we have the lowest teen pregnancy in 40 years in america. we are seeing much better birth control. 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. >> what do you say to those who want to defund planned parenthood and outlaw abortion altogether? >> we trust women to make their decisions and make decisions where they want to go for health care. i know a lot members of this committee feel strongly people should be able to go to their own doctor. this isn't an attack on planned parenthood. this is an attack on 2.7 million patients who each year choose planned parenthood as their health care provider. and i think they should have that right. >> i agree with you completely. we in congress can choose. vulnerable men and women should be able to choose their health care provider. i would just like to end by saying using these videos to justify efforts to defund planned parenthood is extreme

abuse. it is deceitful and undermines the integrity of this committee. thank you. my time has expired. >> the gentlewoman's time has expired. now the gentleman from ohio, mr. jordan. >> if the videos were selectively edited, heavily om+edited, if this was entrapment, all of this untrue, then why did you apologize? >> well, congressman, first, everyone has agreed they were heavily edited -- >> my question is why did you apologize? >> -- the perpetrator 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 -- in my opinion -- it was inappropriate to have a clinical discussion, a nonconfidential,

nonclinical setting. and i told her that. >> what were you apologizing for. >> that she used, i think, in my judgment, it was bad judgment to have a clinical discussion in a nonclinical setting. >> the first video comes out july 14th. two days later you issue an apology. you said, it is unacceptable. i personally apologize for the tone and statements. >> that's what i felt like -- >> no. here's the question. what statements were you a apologizing for? >> it was really the situation that she was in. >> ms. richards, that's not what you said. you said, i apologize for statements. i would like to know and the american people would like to know, which statements in the video were you apologizing for? were you apologizing for statements that are untrue? 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 the video, there was only one video. in that video that you were referencing, which statements were you apologizing for? >> congressman, at the time i'm sure you remember, that video was released. we had no time to actually evaluate how much editing had happened. it was days later. >> which true statements in that video were you apologizing for? >> i was reflecting that on that video, not any particular statement. it did not reflect the compassionate care we provide. >> that raises an important question. so is what you said in your video untrue? you weren't really apologizing for statements made? >> i was apologizing for what was said in a nonclinical setting in a nonappropriate way. and i don't believe -- >> 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. >> i don't believe that doctor -- >> or what i said in the video wasn't true. i wasn't apologizing for any statement. it can't be both positions. it has to be one. which one is it? >> in my judgment, it was inappropriate to have that conversation in a nonclinical setting in a nonconfidential area about clinical matters. and i have told that to dr. nucatola. >> why didn't you say that? >> this wasn't a reporter sticking a mike in front of your face. this was a video you produced to send out to the whole world, not a reporter sticking a mike in your face. disagree on this matter. >> we may have to just agree to disagree on this matter. >> i don't think we need to agree on to disagree.

i think you're not answering my question. >> i've answered it repeatedly -- >> i want to say for the record -- >> this to me is critical. at the moment you did this there was one video. then you do your video in response to that video. and you made a specific statement. i'm sure your staff worked on this. you prepared this. this probably went through a number of drafts. you were very specific in what you said. i apologize for the tone and statements. so there were 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. i'm asking you a simple question. in that first video, tell me what you needed to apologize for. >> the highly edited video. that now, of course, as we have gotten further and i've -- >> the highly edited video that you apologized for. >> i have now read hundreds of pages of all the things that

were said, and what is clear now there were many -- 10 times during that conversation in which dr. nucatola said -- >> it is a simple question. it is as simple and basic as it gets. you don't apologize for things that are inaccurate. you apologize for things that are accurate. 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? >> i think i have already made my explanation. and for the record, dr. nucatola is an excellent doctor. >> i'm not saying she is not. >> you've had your moment. i wanted to make sure that you understood that she provides incredibly compassionate care, and i'm proud of her. >> now recognize the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton. >> 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 take 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 deja vu. and i asked the staff to look and see, isn't there some kind of pattern here? and discovered there were nearly 10 of these deceptive sting operations over the past 10 or 15 years. may i ask you, has any one of those stings uncovered wrongdoing on the part of planned parenthood? >> absolutely not. and thank you, congresswoman norton. i think it is important to recognize this is a tactic that's been used repeatedly, as you say, 10 times of the last 15 years. and every single time it has been thoroughly discredited. >> 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 a committee -- i think the house energy and commerce committee -- to say they have evidence that planned parenthood was selling fetal tissue for profit, which is of course what has been alleged by republicans consistently. of course, there was an investigation. the hearing with this whistle-blower 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 was somebody 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? >> i think it does.

>> 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? >> 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 and to their own personal safety, is it's the patients. that's what keeps you going. >> but is there anything you can do to protect yourselves 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? >> well, we work very hard to protect our patients. and they are our number one priority always. we have security. we take it very, very seriously. it's a shame to think 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 am here voluntarily today, that the facts are on our side. we are proud of the health care we deliver every single year despite the animosity by some. and we are grateful that the american people stands with with planned parenthood as "the wall street journal" poll showed last

night. >> 65%. >> we will now recognize the gentleman from florida for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, ms. richards, for being with us. >> we will now recognize the gentleman from florida for five minutes. >> thank you, ms. richards, for being with us. i guess we are all products of our personal experience. >> we heard the chairman. we heard the ranking member how their lives are 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. from that time, i tried to be a champion for the unborn. they don't have advocates. a lot of groups 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 are 300,000 abortions last year in the united states. is that approximate? >> about 300,000 at planned parenthood. >> at planned parenthood? >> that's correct, sir. >> what's the total in the united states? >> i think it's about a million. actually, don't hold me to that. i don't have the numbers in front of me. >> so basically you provide about a third of the abortions. you would probably have to be the leading provider of abortion in the country, your organization. >> i don't know if that's exactly true. i just know what we do. >> i've 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? >> i don't think the polling reflects that. but i guess it depends i'm not familiar with your district. >> i think -- if you ask people, i think they would. now that's part of it. your most recent controversy raised questions about public money in your organization. i looked at it. i was kind of stunned. it's about 41% of your total money is federal money. it's not just a small amount. because if you had the money you get from different programs, grants, et cetera, it's 41%. and i've had that figure confirmed. that's a significant amount of money. >> well, congressman -- >> 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? >> roughly. there are new ones opening all

the time. >> you told miss loomis you don't have one mammogram machine in one? >> we've never -- mammograms have never -- >> you don't do that. >> we do breast exams. just like my own doctor does. right. >> but your breast exams are actually down significantly. and i've got the numbers from your reports from 830,312 exams in 2009 to 487,029 in 2013. and those are your statistics. so you're getting more money, you're not spending it there. now, do all 650 of the clinics perform abortions? >> no, sir. >> how many? >> roughly half provide abortion services. >> so half of the clinics. again, this is where -- when 41% 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 i do i, that no public money should go into this. mr. cummins said we should do everything we should to put money into research. you're not putting money into research. you are 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, $387,000. another one $377,000. another one a quarter of a million dollars. there are dozens of employees in the quarter 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. >> uh-huh. >> and, again, we don't -- we have at least the perception it not being the case and the chairman outlined travel, lavish parties and expenses. maybe you separate that money out, but i'm telling you, it does not look good. i yield back. >> i would love the chance to respond. i guess that wasn't really -- >> it was more of a comment than a question. we need to keep the pace here. >> okay. >> we will recognize the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. >> welcome, ms. richards. >> thank you, mr. congressman. >> i wish your mom would be here today she'd be handing out texas boots to a lot of my colleagues. >> she's here in spirit. >> thaw. thank god.

you know, i hope every american woman is watching today's hearing. because just the visuals as well as well as the audios tell you a lot. my colleagues have said there's 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 a head of a premier national organization and daring to actually make decisions as head of that organization. lord almighty, what's america coming to? the disrespect, the misogyny 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. rebelieve in rugged individualism and personal liberty, with one big carve-out, though. there's 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 for 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. 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. >> that's correct. >> it would make your job a lot easier, wouldn't it?

>> a lot of women, a lot families, in this country need access to health care that aren't getting it. >> so, if we really mean it, that's what we'd 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 three years 100% of the federal dollars. 90% is 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. >> that's right. >> is there anything else you want to add uninterrupted with some sense of respect, miss richards? let me at least provide that to you. >> well, thank you, congressman. and i did want to respond to some of the -- what's been said.

we are a health care provider to 2.7 million people every year. they come to us by choice. 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. almost half a million breast exams. 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. making sure every woman regardless of her income, immigration status, whether she is insured can get access medical care. that's why we are proud to do it. >> that is called respect. thank you, ms. richards, for being here. >> thank you. >> i recognize the gentlan