Republican Lawmakers Face Grassroots Pressure Over 'War On Contraception'

WASHINGTON -- Women's-rights activists are taking the fight to preserve family-planning funding outside the Beltway, calling on grassroots activists to pressure their representatives into maintaining the Title X program.

Enacted in 1970 as part of the Public Health Service Act, the family-planning program was designed to focus on low-income Americans. The preventive-health services it provides include information and access to contraception, earning the ire of social conservatives.

Republicans have placed a high priority on cutting $327 million from the program, the amount that was requested in the FY 2011 appropriations budget. However, just $317 was appropriated, so the GOP plan would effectively kill the program. Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) has introduced separate legislation to "deny Title X funds to Planned Parenthood or any other abortion provider." In his FY 2012 budget released today, President Obama requests $327 million for the program.

The abortion-rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America launched a campaign on Monday to mobilize activists in six districts where abortion-rights advocates lost to "anti- or mixed-choice representatives" in November's midterm elections. The campaign targets Republican Reps. Charlie Bass (N.H.), Robert Dold (Ill.), Chris Gibson (N.Y.), Richard Hanna (N.Y), Nan Hayworth (N.Y) and Steve Stivers (Ohio).

NARAL is also stepping up pressure on longer-serving members, including Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.) and Republican Reps. Judy Biggert (Ill.), Charlie Dent (Penn.), Mary Bono Mack (Calif.), Rodney Frelinghuysen (N.J), Leonard Lance (N.J), and Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.).

"And where is your alleged 'moderate' representative on this?" reads the email going out to activists in Stivers' district. "We don't know. Rep. Stivers has said nothing of this proposed cut, and it's very possible that he could choose to vote for an anti-choice budget that decimates family planning."

"Politicians who campaigned on the promise of focusing on jobs and the economy need to be held accountable if, at the first possible opportunity, they join with John Boehner to launch a full-fledged war on contraception," NARAL President Nancy Keenan said. "It is the height of hypocrisy for anti-choice politicians to seek to abolish a program that helps prevent unintended pregnancy and thus reduce the need for abortion. How many jobs will be generated by eliminating women's access to birth control?"

Democratic lawmakers are working to increase public attention to Pence's bill and two other measures that would restrict abortion access.

"We have to make this issue too hot to handle," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said during a Thursday conference call with reporters. "I would like to make the fight in the House and see where some of these Republicans are -- maybe we could win it on Title X. I can't believe that everybody who is anti a woman's right to choose is anti-birth control and contraception and family planning. But we don't know that, and we don't have any idea -- or I don't, anyway -- where the Tea Party people come down in all of this."

In an interview with The Huffington Post at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) disagreed with the argument that this focus on social issues is a distraction from the economy.

"It is an economic and a moral issue, so anytime you can kill two birds with one stone, we ought to do that," King said. "And if we can kill the whole flock with one rock, we ought to do that."

Comments

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

05:04 PM on 02/16/2011

Call 202-225-30­21. There is someone in the office now. I told them that I think he is posturing because the more there is a decrease in access to birth control, more women considering their options, and that is either going to mean more orphanages or more abortions.

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

05:00 PM on 02/16/2011

Call Mike Pence's office and tell them you are appauled by this bill. DC Office Phone: [phone]

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

04:47 PM on 02/16/2011

I'm glad this group is targeting the so called "moderate" Republicans in swing districts in congress like Chris Gibson and Nan Hayworth near me in NY state. They won't last, if they buy into this stuff. I know these districts and they won't put up with these GOP throwbacks to the 19th century.

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

04:43 PM on 02/16/2011

I think the reason the GOP wants to fight their war on contraception is because they want more unplanned pregnancies and more women seeking abortions; that way they can keep the issue going, and continue their political posturing. It is sort of like a anti-virus computer company would hate having a type of software that could permanently kill viruses. The more unplanned pregancies, the more the GOP can call us all Baby killers.

[novabird]

09:45 AM on 02/16/2011

The goal of anti-choice extremists and religious fundamentalists go far beyond preventing access to abortions. The fact that they are also aggressively working to prevent access to contraception at the same time is chilling and it makes their misogynist (woman hating) agenda very clear.

Women in Afghanistan lived free and modern lives before the Taliban came to power and brutally crushed their rights. If you do not think this can happen in America, look around you.

[C65]

09:01 AM on 02/16/2011

When this was implemented in the 70's it was an attempt to prevent minorities from
procreating,because it gave them an increase in voting power,before that it was to
keep the family increasing because it kept them inpovished.Now,any and allthings
associated with low income,middle class and women is an attempt to push us back
to the underclass.If they don't women to have access to family planning,then men
SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO VIAGRA!

[wdw808]

12:16 PM on 02/16/2011

agreed.......both should be paid by private insurance or self- pay......not with federal dollars

[e paw]

01:33 AM on 02/16/2011

It is an economic issue: low income mothers receiving welfare to support their many children I think outweighs the cost of funding a program that provides contraceptives. But besides this how barbaric are these people? How can they deny contraceptives?!! They're more concerned with some spilled semen than with the countless to-be poverty-stricken mothers and children. Some abandoned and some simply living out their lives in deplorable conditions with little hope for the future while drainign the country of the little resources it has for helping quell poverty. It's my choice if I want a child, goddam it!

[DeuxExMachina]

02:10 AM on 02/16/2011

Many of the Planned Parenthood supporters writing here seem to think that children are the problem and that if only these poor and immigrant families had less of them then they would be alright as if they would miraculously achieve a good life.
I live in Harlem, NYC and in reality the main concerns of the people here are a lack of job opportunities, low wages when hired, lack of GENERAL health care for themselves and their children, lack of decent public schools so that the next generation can join the middle classes. The large sums of money going to NGOs like Planned Parenthood would be better allocated to providing these much needed services among the community.

[e paw]

02:24 AM on 02/16/2011

Ok how does tackling the issue from one perspective prevent you from doing it from another? No one is disputing that athe poor need higher wages, but you cannot mean to tell me, enless you really have your head in the sand, that having children you can't afford to keep does nto restrict your possibilities. My grandmother did not have access to contraceptives with the result that my mother grew up in a house of seven in horrid conditions, even though her mother was an educated, hardworking woman. How out of touch of reality are you?

[Tommygun264]

06:34 AM on 02/16/2011

And how, pray tell, is a girl who drops out of high school because she gets pregnant, either due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of access to birth control, or both; supposed to "better herself"? They can't all get paid tens of thousands posing for pictures with the baby and go on "Dancing With the Stars".

[ebert]

09:17 PM on 02/15/2011

Can someone answer this question for me? It's been awhile since I utilized PP's services, but I don't remember exams, birth control, or abortions being free. Is this still the case and do people who are against PP understand that their tax dollars are only part of the operating budget and not used for the services themselves? Maybe condoms and information are free, but what else is?

[Okiemama]

11:21 PM on 02/15/2011

Planned Parenthood has one billion dollar budget. Tax dollars provide a little over 300 million of that. Planned Parenthood charges fees but the clinics I know about have a sliding scale for low income clients and it does take insurance. It has 700,000 active donors. Abortion is only 2% of the services it provides. Its main job is providing contraception (35%) and testing for and treating STDs (34%). It also provides cancer screenings , particularly for low income women (17%). My daughter used it for an annual check-up once when she could not get an appointment with an ob-gyn for two months. They saw her that week. And she is a doctor herself. Her insurance covered the exam.

[DeuxExMachina]

01:08 AM on 02/16/2011

I have no problem with the services provided by a non-profit such as Planned Parenthood save that it receives large funding from the tax-payers every year. After all if supporters and yourself can't fund Planned Parenthood fully from tax-deduct­ible donations then the organizati­on hasn't got as much support as you think.
And before some blogger says , "Well we fund the Pentagon and wars of choice", I would like funding for those to be cut as well.

[wdw808]

12:26 PM on 02/16/2011

then they will not even notice the lack of the tax dollars

[Monday Morning]

09:01 PM on 02/15/2011

This is the mentality of the {RIGHT}

My American woman wife voted for Rand Paul thank you very much. We love the guy and he is a fighter for citizens rights against an intrusive govt.

You seriously don't have a clue of what you speak of. But of course you are spilling talking points from a pro-aborti on organizati on.”

Is there any hope for the {RIGHT}

[Mara Para]

09:14 PM on 02/15/2011

Are you talking to a {voice} you hear in your {head}?

[Okiemama]

11:24 PM on 02/15/2011

What is a "woman wife"? Do you have a "man wife" also? If you hate intrusive government, why would you want it intruding on the most private part of your life? Does not make sense. Please explain "don't have a clue of what you speak of". What "speak"?

[Tommygun264]

06:37 AM on 02/16/2011

Monday Morning neglected to put quotes around it, but it is a direct quote posted by a right winger on another thread.

[Kim Visan]

08:27 PM on 02/15/2011

Not providing access and information about contraception is just another way to control women! Disgusting that American women in the 21st century have to fight for this right!

[e paw]

01:42 AM on 02/16/2011

Ah, but it's not our concern, right? Each fend for himself, herself. THAT'S what this country was built upon (Nevermind the "for the people" part) Until it's actually me that needs help, then it's back to righteous self-entitlement.

[hazyafternoonsunshine]

07:02 PM on 02/15/2011

Reduction in accesss to birth control = increase in abortion. Whenever the anti-abortion folks get in power, they always drive up the number of abortions. Failing to connect the dots is what they do best.

[R Davis]

06:53 PM on 02/15/2011

The only reason the GOP is fighting contraception is because they prefer to keep their head in the sand and promote they uninformed rightwing christian agenda that has a complete lack of compassion and empathy for the poor. They have rejected Jesus Great commandment of loving their neighbor as themselves. They've replaced it with a fear based hate filled agenda to keep the poor poorer and keep the rich richer. This is done by cutting spending on programs what will help people pull themselves out of poverty.

[drummer 40]

06:21 PM on 02/15/2011

On the other side of this issue, the South Dakota is on the verge of passing legislation that will categorize a killing done to prevent the killing a fetus as "justifiable homicide". They're legalizing the murder of abortion doctors during the act of aborting the fetus.

[DeuxExMachina]

06:45 PM on 02/15/2011

But I can understand that. At the moment a person violently attacking a pregnant woman casuing her to miscarry cannot be convicted of murder of the fetus as the latter is not yet considered a human life in legal terms. At least this way the pregnant women can defend both herself and her baby by neutralizing the attacker without having to worry about trying to justify herself in court trying to protect her baby.

[drummer 40]

06:48 PM on 02/15/2011

Scott Peterson was charged with two murders for killing his pregnant wife.

I think all proof I need to know this is about defending doctor killers is in the response of one of the Republicans who sponsored the bill, "As far as aquitting [people who kill abortion doctors], never say never."

[Mara Para]

07:17 PM on 02/15/2011

Please list the functions of federal government you approve of.

[Mara Para]

06:50 PM on 02/15/2011

Do not respond.

[drummer 40]

06:59 PM on 02/15/2011

Derp?

[aztlan]

04:49 PM on 02/15/2011

Talk about not taking responsibility for their actions, It was under W 's administration that we were hit on 9/11, and they've tried to blame Clinton for it. There were no WMD's but no apology from the cons. Trillions put on the national credit card by the Bush administration, but no responsibility taken by the cons. The greatest collapse since the great depression, but the cons blame Democrats and Obama for all that has gone wrong, even when they were in charge, over the last 50 years, The repubs never ever take responsibility for anything that goes wrong.

[puddintane]

04:59 PM on 02/15/2011

They are believers in "the dog pharted" philosophy...

[aztlan]

01:50 AM on 02/16/2011

Or "he who smelt it, dealt it".

[SF TKF]

04:06 PM on 02/15/2011

So . . . no contraception, no abortions, no social services. What exactly is the GOP plan for America?

[sgtsarcasm]

04:26 PM on 02/15/2011

Creating inmates, valets and soldiers....what did you think it is?

[DeuxExMachina]

04:29 PM on 02/15/2011

I don't know about the GOP but I would like more people to take more responsibility for their lives and that of their children and businesses should survive on their merits. People are always harping on about freedom of choice but with that comes responsibilities. This is theorectically the "land of the free" but with a lot of government pork has become the "land of freebies" for many interest groups..

[sgtsarcasm]

04:37 PM on 02/15/2011

"I would like more people to take more responsibi­lity for their lives and that of their children"

That is precisely what these social services empower people to do... Condom distribution prevents additional strain on the everyday taxpayer. What exactly is your issue?

[Okiemama]

05:02 PM on 02/15/2011

And most of that government pork and "freebies" goes to corporations and the already wealthy.