(A good journalist would have discussed this a few days ago. However, life is busy — and a little lazy at times — so I’m a bit behind. Nonetheless, I certainly have some remarks to share. Better late than never, right?)
When Republicans assumed control earlier this year, we all anticipated change. Finance reform, among a variety of topics, was certainly expected. But when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to slash all funding of Planned Parenthood — a savings of a few million, I assume — shock was undoubtedly the majority reaction.
Currently, more than 800 clinics serve low-income women and girls throughout the United States. Approximately three million people visit these locations for reproductive health reasons, including birth control, AIDS testing and cervical cancer screenings. But instead of acknowledging and assisting the great need for these Planned Parenthood services, the House has decided to make them nearly inaccessible to those seeking the help. Talk about a grave misfortune…
One would assume a progressive society such as ours would be doing whatever feasible to decrease teenage pregnancy and STD/HIV transmission. Removing funding from an agency as vital as this does just the opposite, practically condoning unprotected sex and a lack of reproductive health. Sex education and contraceptive initiatives remain an important need despite budgetary constraints the government faces. Why can’t those members of the House who favored this decision see that beyond the dollar signs and idealistic conservative notions regarding sexual activity?
Will the Senate follow in the House’s footsteps, nailing the coffin shut on Planned Parenthood monies? Who knows, but I surely hope not. Debbie Hines from The Huffington Post shared her thoughts on this topic and, honestly, I’m not sure I could have said it much better. Check out her article, “Republicans Cut Contraceptives for Women but Allow for Horses,” and join me in crossing your fingers that Planned Parenthood somehow prevails in the weeks ahead.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Someone somewhere did the math and the money we’d “save” by cutting funding to Planned Parenthood would fund the war(s) for 3 hours and 51 minutes. Meanwhile, there’s no problem with giving money to contraceptives for horses, NASCAR decals, and other tomfoolerly.
I’d love to get passionately upset about how dumb the House GOP is being, but the likelyhood of anything they passed last Friday getting through the Senate is slim-to-none. Thankfully there’s people with (a little more) common sense running the show over there.
[Reply]
A few issues (sorry):
1) Saying “Someone somewhere did the math and the money we’d “save” by cutting funding to Planned Parenthood would fund the war(s) for 3 hours and 51 minutes.” has nothing to do with the cut being right or wrong. We have a 14+TRILLION $$$ debt & a budget deficit of around 1.2-1.4 (IIRC). Any given cut may not make a difference, but when they all add together, they do. Using your logic, then no cut is worth making since it would be so much less than the debt or deficit. And we need to cut A LOT!
2) Isn’t (or won’t) the services offered by planned parenthood (other than abortion) be covered by Obamacare when fully enacted? If so, why do we need to give money to PP as well?? It is supposed to give everyone health care, so it seems such organizations would be redundant.
3) The argument comparing contraceptives for horses to control population with contraceptive for women (apparently to also control population/prevent them getting pregnant) is really demeaning to woman & I am surprised that two women (plus the author) would even make this suggestion. If it was made by a mad NOW would be looking to have him removed from the general population. Are you REALLY suggesting that woman can not control themselves from rampant acts of procreation & need an outside organization to let them act out? (NOTE: I am NOT defending (or approving) the horse contraception, just arguing the use of it to justify the need for planned parenthood to give out the service. People can have self-control if they want; horses can not.)
4) The Huffington Post(!?!) is not exactly the most unbiased & reliable of sources. If anything, it is on the extreme fringes of news organizations. Sorry, I have a hard time taking them & their citations seriously. CNN, Wash Post, NY Time, NY Post, Fox, WSJ, etc all have their various biases but are all more credible than HuffPo.
5) And all of this does not even touch on the fact that planned parenthood is the leading provider & proponent of abortion (you all may or may not agree that this is the killing of an unborn baby), but is this REALLY the type of organization that tax-payer money should be used to support? (And no, I do not think that any money should go to right to life groups either.)
Responses to any of this would be nice to see (I am not looking for flames & I tried not to attack anyone personally above.) An open & honsest discussion may help all involved, however.
thanks,
Joe
[Reply]
Mindy Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:31 pm
@Joe, 1) I know little about the validity of the comment comparing Planned Parenthood funding to war-dedicated monies. The war, however, is a ridiculous waste of dollars, in my opinion.
2) I also don’t know much about Obamacare, to be honest. Still being new to the “I’m an adult and pay for my health insurance” thing and barely understanding the complexities of my own insurance, I haven’t paid much attention to this matter. If Obamacare WILL be enacted and provide the same level of services, then it doesn’t make sense to fund both. If gaps will emerge or if Obamacare will not pass, then completely eliminating PP as a budget item remains ridiculous. (Too many “if” scenarios…)
3) The comparison didn’t bother me, only because I saw it more on the surface level. Not funding PP yet putting money toward controlling the horse population is a poor use of tax dollars, without a doubt. I’m sure the author made the comparison for effect, more than anything.
4) When I googled “Planned Parenthood,” the HuffPo article was one of the first to come up under most recent news. And when I read it, I really couldn’t have expressed my aggravation with the House news quite as well as this author did. The Huffington Post is definitely one of the more unbiased news agencies. But I wasn’t exactly trying to post something unbiased here. I wanted an opinion piece against removing funding from this organization, and this one fit well. If I were writing a news article, HuffPo would be the last resource I’d utilize. Luckily, my blog isn’t subject to such restraints.
5) I am *SUPER* pro-choice, lol, just to make sure we’re clear there. I don’t know the breakdown of funding streams to know what portion specifically goes toward abortions (talking about the procedure itself, not counseling about the decision). Do I think taxpayer cash should directly fund abortions of women and girls? No. But I don’t think that the simple offering of that service by Planned Parenthood should make it unworthy of taxpayer dollars.
With such a complete and total monetary crisis at hand, I do understand a need to cut funding through various avenues, and decreasing funding to programs seems logical. But slashing it entirely from Planned Parenthood simply doesn’t seem like a wise decision for the millions who, as of this moment, cannot afford similar services elsewhere.
[Reply]
TOPolk Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:20 pm
@Joe,
Since I’m pretty much in agreement with Mindy (on all points), there’s no need for me to rehash what she said. If any of this gets past the Senate, then I’ll be more than happy to join a discussion on how logical any of this is (or isn’t). As it stands now, this is just going to cause us to get all in a huff over nothing.
[Reply]
Mindy,
Appreciate your responses. I know that we generally come from different sides of the political spectrum & I think that is helps to see more fully where each side is coming from.
Have a question for you regarding you being pro-choice (yes, I am generally against abortion) & the opinions of what seems to be most people that support abortion.
What are your views on the death penalty? It seems that most liberals/progressives/left/democrats think that abortion is OK (good??) but that the death penalty is bad.
I do not understand this pairing of opinions. I can understand people being against abortion & death penalty, or for both, or even for the death penalty & against abortion, but not the common liberal position.
From my perspective, abortion is the killing of an innocent, unborn baby who has done nothing to lose his/her life while a person receiving the death penalty has done grievous things to earn the loss of their life. While people can argue exceptions to either (e.g., rape/incest/mother’s health or falsely getting convicted, respectively), these are by far exceptions than common occurrences. So, sticking with the vast majority of occurrences of these happening, how are the positions compatible? I would really like to hear your thoughts on this.
FWIW, one of the reasons I dislike abortions so much is how some women use the procedures. I knew of a couple of women that had 3-4 abortions because they got pregnant & didn’t want the bother of having a child. And these were not women that could not afford contraception. Many proponents of abortion argue that this doesn’t happen, but it does all too often. Sad, really…
thanks. See U in April,
Joe
[Reply]
Mindy Reply:
February 25th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
@Joe, Regarding your first question, once upon a time, I was very against capital punishment. I think Whitey often termed me a “bleeding heart,” ha. But that was way back when, in high school, when I really didn’t understand everything as well. Now that I do, I am not against the death penalty. I can’t really put into words my thoughts about it — plus it never sounds good to attempt justifying killing someone, ha — but no, I’m not against it. I do think it’s a just punishment in certain situations.
As for the second part of your comment, I certainly don’t think that abortion should be used as a form of birth control. Although I believe abortion is a viable option, some women definitely abuse it, routinely turning to that rather than simply going on birth control or using some form of protection.
[Reply]