What H.Res.7 Really Tells Us About Congress in South Carolina
Some resolutions in Congress are complete utter bullshit, but written with soft, compassionate language, invoking values we all care about: health, family, community, personal responsibility. Sherri Bigg’s first bill, House Resolution 7 (H.Res.7), appears to be one of those. It speaks about women’s healthcare, education, empowerment, and holistic support.
But scratch the surface, and a different picture emerges.
The Language Sounds Good, but What’s Missing?
H.Res.7 praises “Pro Women’s Healthcare Centers” (PWHCs) and calls for care that is:
- “Comprehensive” and “high-quality”
- Inclusive of “physical, mental, and spiritual wellness”
- Centered on women’s empowerment and family support
If that were the full story, this would be non-partisan and accepted by everyone. Who wouldn’t support better care for women?
But there’s a term repeated throughout the resolution that deserves attention: “life-affirming.” In this context, that phrase doesn’t mean support for life in a broad, moral sense. It has a specific political meaning: opposition to abortion and contraception.
I’d like to say that this langauge is embedded in the mission statements of the centers being praised, but the website doesn’t even exit. The whois data about the website is private, too.
What Is This Resolution Actually Doing?
H.Res.7 is not a law. It doesn’t allocate resources, mandate policy, or even propose a program. It’s a public statement, a symbolic gesture.
Inflation pressures families, Pickens and Anderson Country hospitals struggle, working parents juggle impossible schedules, Congress (Sherri Biggs) took time to… write a press release about a non-existent issue.
There’s no policy here. No action. Just affirmation of a specific ideology, dressed up as concerns for women.
And all of it paid for with taxpayer dollars and official letterhead. This is what we are paying for.
Why That Should Concern Everyone
Conservative, liberal, independent, or something in between, this raises real questions about how seriously our elected officials are doing their jobs. Government efficiently, right? House of Representatives placeholder, if you ask me. A placeholder to cut and paste Washington’s agenda.
Even if you support the values behind the resolution, it’s worth asking:
- Why spend time and taxpayer dollars to write a symbolic statement instead of crafting real legislation?
- Why introduce something that doesn’t change anything, yet frames itself as meaningful action?
I guess this is practice for saying yes to more important issues that Washington tells her to say yes to. You can tell this was handed to her by her staff to sign. Again, just a placeholder for saying yes to everything that comes down from the top.
Leadership, Not Lip Service
Representatives are elected to bring solutions, not ads in newspapers. Submiting bologne documents instead of policy is nothing more than a con artist selling bull shit to the public. That’s all we need, one of the 435 members of the House to be a placeholder, not standing up for South Carolina distrcit three.
If a member of Congress wants to promote better healthcare access, let them do the hard work of legislating, not issuing endorsements wrapped in legislative cut and paste language.
H.Res.7 isn’t governance
And in a time when Real Americans are looking for accountability, rising above the con artist propaganda, and practical solutions to everyday problems, branding isn’t enough. Not to mention the staff did all the work, paid for by your tax dollars. What has she actually done besides sign documents her staff provided her?
Source:
House Resolution 7 (2025) Full Text – Congress.gov
