hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Recognizes past and present injustices in women's healthcare.
Ms. Ansari (Democrat) and 24 co-sponsors.
Introduced in House, referred to committee.
This resolution recognizes the long history of dismissed pain and denied autonomy in women's health care, particularly for marginalized groups. It affirms the federal government's role in promoting patient dignity, shared decision-making, and increased research. Representative Ansari, a Democrat, introduced the resolution, which has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. If passed, it would express the House's official stance on these critical issues but would not create new laws or programs.
Introduced Mar 30, 2026
This resolution was introduced in the House of Representatives on March 30, 2026, and immediately referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. For it to progress, the committee would need to consider and approve it. As a House Resolution, it only needs to pass the House to achieve its purpose of expressing the House's position; it does not go to the Senate or the President to become law.
While this resolution does not directly create new laws or funding, its passage would signal the House's official support for critical changes in women's healthcare. It aims to encourage greater respect for individual dignity and empower patients to make informed decisions about their care. Additionally, it highlights a commitment to increasing federal funding for research into women's health conditions and improving access to care.
Supporters Say
This resolution acknowledges historical injustices and promotes patient-centered women's health care.
Critics Say
The bill text does not outline specific criticisms regarding this resolution's principles or intent.
This resolution aims to unite the House in acknowledging historical injustices and setting a clear direction for patient-centered women's health care. The bill text itself does not present opposing viewpoints, as resolutions typically seek broad agreement on principles. However, debates on such topics often revolve around the extent of government involvement in healthcare or specific historical interpretations.