Smith Thwarts Clinton, Specter: Mexico City Policy Provisions Restored to US Law

Thanks to the tenacity of Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ), the Mexico City Policy — which prohibits US funds from going to foreign, non-government organizations (NGOs) that perform or promote abortion — has been written into US law. The Smith amendment was added to legislation passed to refund the United Nations in November, and specifically restricts the US Agency for International Development (USAID) from using its $385 million in population control monies to fund abortions.

The Mexico City policy, named after the 1993 world population conference in Mexico City, dates from 1984, when President Ronald Reagan imposed the abortion restriction by executive order. Clinton revoked this order upon taking office, allowing the International Planned Parenthood Federation and other abortion — providing and promoting agencies free access to federal funds. The restoration of the Mexico City policy is a “significant victory.” said Congressman Smith at PRI’s 19 November press conference in Washington. DC.

Abortion advocates were outraged by the decision, which effectively denies US funds to their international allies. It also puts America in opposition to international “pro-choice” ideologues whose “reproductive rights” agenda threatens the sovereign rights of nations, such as Ireland, Venezuela and Kenya, which have repeatedly voted against the legalization of abortion.

Given the agenda of the current administration, the restoration of the Mexico City policy in the omnibus spending bill is viewed by population control opponents as a remarkable achievement. Prior to this victory, the effort to restore Mexico City language crossed paths with efforts to sever US funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), The final deal to restore Mexico City language was hashed out in behind-the-scenes negotiations between the President and the Republican Leadership who were well-appraised of the controversy surrounding UNFPA’s Kosovo operations. The item to refund UNFPA (in a separate Foreign Aid Bill), proved key in Smith’s victory to restore Mexico City language back into US law.

The Mexico City Policy

According to the Mexico City provisions, all of “96% of the fiscal year 2000 international population funding [$370 million of the total $385 million] will not go to foreign groups that perform or promote abortion in other countries.”1

Since 1995, amendments have been offered to foreign spending bills to preserve pro-family safeguards implemented under President Reagan. These amendments respected the sovereign rights of nations which refused to legalize abortion.2 Unfortunately, through the legislative process, compromises have enabled the current president to waive these safeguards.

Under the new provision, the president will be allowed to invoke a waiver to fund abortion overseas through a specific $15 million allotment to US Agency of International Development (USAID). The law states that if the president invokes the waiver, then $12.5 million (of the overall $385 million population control grant) would be shifted towards basic health programs that demonstrably have a “high impact on [reducing] child mortality and morbidity.”3

In his desire to promote abortion as a method of family planning in the developing world, Clinton did invoke the waiver immediately (on 30 November), triggering a $12.5 million influx of funds that will go toward immunizing children against fatal diseases such polio and pidtheria.

The major drawback of the new law is that the Mexico City provision in the omnibus spending bill is not, as yet, codified, and will there therefore have to be renewed each year. But starting from the first year in the new millennium, country affiliates of organizations like the International Planned Parenthood Federation will be prevented from using US funds to perform abortions as a method of family planning, or intrude upon the sovereign rights of nations who outlaw the procedure.

Behind the Lines

In the Foreign Operations bill, $25 million in US funds to UNFPA were restored this year. Last year, UNFPA’s $25 million annual US taxpayer grant was out when Congress concluded that UNFPA was collaborating with China’s one-child policy, which consists of forced abortion and sterilization, fines and other involuntary deterrents for non-compliance, and the targeting of unwanted minorities in order to reduce their population.

The current foreign spending bill, however, includes a provision to gut the allotment of US funds to UNFPA equal to the amount that UNFPA spends in China. Congressman Smith, at PRI’s press conference, called the China provision “meaningless,” because of the fungibility of funds. Smith fought hard during this year’s congressional session to preserve last year’s total funding cut to UNFPA. But through an arcane political maneuver, his legislation never made it to the floor of the House. A substitute amendment, with the China provision, was offered by Congressman Tom Campbell (R-CA), and passed by a narrow margin.

Despite its passage, opposition to funding UNFPA continued to mount as the House and Senate versions of the bill approached reconciliation in conference committees. The point of contention was UNFPA’s activities in Kosovo, as reported by PRI. To date, PRI has sent three investigators to the Kosovo region, and has compiled a series of defensible reports on UNFPA’s controversial Kosovo operations.

Of chief interest to legislators on Capitol Hill was UNFPA’s own admission that it established permanent operations in Kosovo “at the request of the Yugoslavian government.”4 This request from the Milosevic government came at a time when the Kosovars were suffering ethnic cleansing at the command of the Serbian strongman himself.5

Members of Congress were also concerned that UNFPA had distributed morning-after pills to the region, sufficient to last a population of 350,000 for up to six months.6 Distribution took place without information of the abortion-inducing nature of the chemical,7 raising concerns about lack of informed consent. PRI also heard from the head gynecologist of the maternity ward in Kosovo, Sjedullah Hoxha, who said he was “induced” by UNFPA with promises of appliances and basic health supplies in exchange for his public support UNFPA’s campaign in the region.8

In Pristina, PRI found that UNFPA was promoting the services of UK-based abortion-provider Marie Stopes, in apparent violation of internationally recognized regulations and norms.9 At the same time, infant mortality rates in the Pristina maternity ward have skyrocketed for lack of delivery of basic health supplies and incubators promised by UNFPA.10 This echoes the concerns voiced by PRI at the start of the Kosovar refugee crisis that UNFPA’s bureaucracy and population control agenda has bottlenecked the delivery of life-saving supplies and equipment, at the expense of the lives of Kosovar newborns.

Thanks to the work of pro-family champion Michael Schwartz, legislative director for Congressman Tom Coburn (R-OK), key Congressmen were appraised of the dangers to newborns and mothers caused by UNFPA in Kosovo, and the House began to turn away from supporting UNFPA.

After it emerged from conference, the Foreign Aid Bill was deemed too paltry in general by Democrats, and needed Republican solidarity for passage. But pro-family Republicans linked arms to oppose UNFPA funding. Leading Democrats also opposed UNFPA funding. Congressman John P. Murtha’s (D-PA] foreign operation staffers argued that the vote that approved UNFPA funding was a mistake, given UNFPA’s admission that its campaign began “at the request” of the Milosevic government.

But as the conference report approached the floor of the House for a final vote, Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), the key vote in the Senate, insisted that he would oppose the Foreign Aid bill if it did not contain funding for UNFPA. At the same time, Specter opposed the restoration of Mexico City in the omnibus package.

Specter would not brook. But neither would Chris Smith, who secured House support for Mexico City language.

In signing this year’s foreign spending laws, final negotiations between the President and congressional leaders took place behind closed doors. UNFPA funding was granted. But fierce opposition to UNFPA, caused by the controversies surrounding UNFPA’s population control campaign in Kosovo, proved to be a key bargaining chip in restoring provisions of the Mexico City Policy which prevent NGOs from performing, or lobbying for, abortions in the name of family planning.