Rules Committee clears bill to protect state use of TANF funds for pregnancy resource centers after heated debate over oversight
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
By reported rule, the committee advanced HR 6,945 to prevent federal restrictions on states using TANF funds for pregnancy resource centers; backers called it state‑flexibility protection, opponents said it would remove accountability and could funnel federal dollars to centers that provide misleading medical information.
The Rules Committee reported HR 6,945, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act, which would amend the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families statute to prohibit the federal government from categorically preventing states from using TANF dollars to support pregnancy resource centers.
Representative Adrian Smith, who testified in support, said pregnancy resource centers provide material assistance and parenting support to low‑income mothers and cited national figures: "In 2024, over 2,700 pregnancy resource centers across the country aided nearly 2,000,000 individuals," he said, adding an estimated annual value of services of about $452 million. Smith argued the bill preserves long‑standing state flexibility in TANF implementation.
Opponents, led by Representative Judy Chu and echoed by Ranking Member McGovern and others, said the bill would remove accountability and could allow TANF funds to flow to so‑called crisis pregnancy centers that allegedly provide misleading or medically inaccurate information, often without licensed medical staff. Chu cited a multi‑state study of hundreds of centers and described specific cases where patients were allegedly misled and later required emergency care.
A Democratic amendment (offered by Representative McGovern using Del Bene language) that would have barred TANF funding to any pregnancy center found by a state medical board to have provided misleading medical information or endangered women's health was offered to the rule and defeated by voice vote; a recorded roll call later showed the amendment failed, 3 yeas to 8 nays. The committee then adopted the motion to report the three‑measure package on a recorded vote (8 yeas, 3 nays).
Supporters said existing state remedies and licensing laws address fraud and malpractice and that the bill simply protects states' discretion. Opponents said the legislation lifts an existing layer of federal oversight and highlighted audits and investigations in some states that had led to restrictions on TANF spending to certain centers. The committee referred the rule to the floor; debate was closed under the rule the committee approved.