9
19 November 2007 Vol. 9 / No. 43
Dear Colleague,
Why should millions of pro-lifers be forced to subsidize America’s largest abortion provider? Mike Pence, one of the most highly regarded pro-lifers in the House of Representatives, believes they shouldn’t have to. Neither do we. Let your Congressman know you agree.
Steven W. Mosher
FIGHTING FOR OUR RIGHTS:
WHY THE TITLE X ABORTION PROVIDER
PROHIBITION ACT SHOULD BE A NO-BRAINER
Once again, a sensible Congressman has pointed out the glaringly obvious to America’s pro-choice lobby: regardless of what you believe about abortion, it is unethical, un-democratic, and simply un-American to force taxpayers to pay for something that they have moral issues with.
Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN), introduced legislation earlier this month that seeks to amend the current Title X family planning funding. Under this amendment, tax dollars would prohibited from going toward domestic abortion providers, much like the Mexico City Policy does for NGO’s abroad.
However, what Mr. Pence is eager to emphasize is that his amendment does not cut funds to family planning. According to a statement released from his office on November 8, the bill does not “cut one penny from family planning funds. The bill does not affect hospitals. In fact, hospitals are specifically exempted.” A quick read of the bill proves exactly that.
According to the amendment itself, it “does not apply with respect to a hospital, so long as such hospital does not . . . provide funds to any non-hospital entity that performs an abortion [other than in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother],” similar to the Mexico City Policy. Unlike the Mexico City Policy, however, the bill does not prohibit abortion recommendations. It does not even touch contraception. It can in no way be bent or twisted into a “gag rule” or any kind.
Rep Mike Pence (R-IN)
All Mr. Pence’s bill demands is that the rights of pro-life Americans be respected. “There is simply no reason in the world why the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans should be used to underwrite abortion providers in this country,” says Pence. Taxpayer dollars should not be indiscriminately handed out to organizations that promote abortion, when so many Americans have serious moral issues with the practice.
Nevertheless, American pro-choicers have gotten themselves worked up over the amendment. As occurs every time there is even a hint of abortion restriction, the old, tired arguments are trotted out.
“Rep. Mike Pence,” contends Birth Control Watch, “has turned his attention to making contraception more difficult to access in the United States . . . Pence and his anti-family planning extremists would like you to think this is an anti-abortion bill but, if passed, it will lead to a lot more.” Birth Control Watch insists that by denying funds to organizations like Planned Parenthood, one is actually increasing abortions, seeing as “contraception represents 37% of services [Planned Parenthood] provides.”
Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC)
This is, of course, shelving the fact that Planned Parenthood is the one harming the family planning cause by steadfastly refusing to soften its stance on abortion. If Planned Parenthood did so, they would be eligible for funds under this Title X amendment and thus able to distribute contraceptives with aplomb. As one can see from reading the bill, they wouldn’t have to soften their stance that much.
Other groups, like NARAL, have already spoken about Pence’s earlier stance against Title X funding for overseas NGO’s. This earlier amendment, which would have similarly refused tax dollars to abortion organizations was defeated 231 – 189 earlier this year. NARAL’s arguments, like all the others, are stale and weary. “Rep. Pence launched a direct attack on birth control,” NARAL president Nancy Keenan raged. “Anti-choice politicians want to block women’s access to contraception, which is the best way to reduce the need for abortion.” This is only further proof that these activists have sacrificed all on the altar of abortion-on-demand. The fight was never about women’s rights or reproductive health. The fight is about the abortion religion, and all is casualty to that.
At the House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing on the Mexico City Policy last month, Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC) pointedly remarked that Mexico City is an inconsistency in U.S. policy. It is inconsistent that American tax dollars are not allowed to go to foreign abortion-providing NGOs, and yet they are permitted to flow freely into the coffers of domestic organizations like Planned Parenthood. Rep. Pence’s amendment simply recognizes this fact and seeks to rectify it.
Colin Mason is the Director for Media Production at PRI.
