iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Indiana Set To Defund Planned Parenthood

Family Planning

First Posted: 04/27/11 01:24 PM ET Updated: 06/27/11 06:12 AM ET

The Indiana state legislature is on the verge of becoming the first state to block Medicaid reimbursements for low-income patients seeking basic health services at Planned Parenthood clinics.

House Bill 1210, introduced by state Rep. Eric Turner (R-Cicero) in January, takes a number of swipes at abortion rights and includes a provision that would prohibit the state of Indiana from contracting with "any entity that performs abortions or maintains or operates a facility where abortions are performed." While the provision does not name a specific health provider, it effectively singles out Planned Parenthood, which receives $3 million dollars a year from the state.

"We have patients booking appointments for pap smears as we speak, but if the bill passes and the intent is met, we would literally have to get in touch with these patients and say, 'You come prepared to pay for your services, or you will need to find another medical home,'" said Betty Cockrum, president of Planned Parenthood Indiana, which currently serves about 22,000 low-income patients under Titles X, V, and XX and through Medicaid.

Republican lawmakers are advancing the bill to prevent taxpayer-funded abortions, even though federal law already prohibits them. "The fundamental issue is that when we take tax dollars and fund any entity that performs abortions, we're forcing taxpayers to support a practice that many feel is objectionable," State Sen. Scott Schneider (R-Indianapolis), the author of the provision to cut Planned Parenthood's funding, told HuffPost in an interview.

Yet opponents say the bill will cost taxpayers more in the long run, since cutting funding to Planned Parenthood would actually increase costs to the state. The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration reported in 2008 that over half of all Indiana births were financed by Medicaid, averaging a cost of $11,250 per birth. Indiana spends over $450 million on the pregnancies of women with Medicaid and their deliveries annually. Planned Parenthood estimates that cutting funds to family planning would increase the amount of unintended pregnancies in Indiana and increase the state's Medicaid costs by roughly $96 million per year, not counting the expensive follow-up care required with many low-income births and the cost of new dependents being born into the Medicaid system.

Conservative lawmakers pushing the bill are not convinced by the numbers.

"That's nonsense. I don't know where they come up with that figure," Schneider said. "Planned Parenthood has a choice. If they want to continue to receive taxpayer subsidies, they can stop a portion of their business which they say is very low: their abortion services."

Planned Parenthood estimates that abortions count for about 3 percent of its services -- the rest are preventative care, testing for sexually transmitted infections, cancer screenings, and contraceptive services.

The author of the Indiana House bill signed off on the state Senate version Tuesday night, but it still may have some legal hurdles to clear before it makes it to Gov. Mitch Daniels' desk. Federal Medicaid rules prohibit states from discriminating against a provider for any reason other than its ability to provide quality health services, and state officials worry that violating that rule by discriminating against Planned Parenthood could cost Indiana all $4 million of the federal funds it receives for family planning.

"If funding is cut off, CMS could look at that, and that could jeopardize the other funding that we get from them around family planning services," FSSA Secretary Michael Gargano told the Indianapolis Star. "That's our concern -- that they would cut those funds off."

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services confirmed on Wednesday that states "cannot pick and choose who gets family planning funds," but would not comment on whether Indiana would face sanctions for violating this rule.

Either way, Planned Parenthood of Indiana is prepared to sue.

"We have said all along that we would challenge [House Bill] 1210 in court if it became law," Cockrum told HuffPost. "It's important to remember that abortion is a legal procedure here in this country, and the federal government does not look kindly upon singling out an entity for punitive action because they are providing a constitutionally protected service."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,562
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (39 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kvolovesart
11:24 AM on 05/04/2011
Good...why the hell should tax payers pay for this? Maybe more babies will get the chance to live now...
11:02 AM on 04/30/2011
I think it's important to remember that, again, this issue isn't black and white. And that while, yes, there are some awful people who use abortions to "take care" of their drunken one night stands, there are also a lot of people who take the necessary precautions and the still get pregnant. Condoms break and pills aren't 100% either. Yes, sex is risky behavior, but so is driving. Accidents happen and the "if you're not ready to deal with the consequences you shouldn't do it argument" sounds great on paper, but it doesn't work in real life. Sex is a natural and healthy part of adult relationships and mandating that people only do it for reproduction is absurd. Is having premarital sex the world's greatest idea? Probably not, but just being married doesn't make you ready for a baby.
There's also the issues of danger to the mother and, of course, rape, which becomes even more of a concern when you add in the fact that some people are trying to redefine rape and the ignorance people have surrounding it. I knew a girl who wholehearted believed a woman couldn't get pregnant from rape because she would be so tense the semen couldn't get in. If she got pregnant, she must have enjoyed it.
I know these don't make up nearly the majority of abortion cases, but unfortunately there's no
"abortions for some, miniature American flags for others." If you take away any, you take away all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftySansPancho
'(o_0)'
03:40 PM on 04/29/2011
If the government were to intervene in reproductive decisions rationally, and in the way that is actually most likely to reduce abortions, they would do one simple thing:

Make it a felony for a man to engage in sex without using a condom.

Of course, the so-called "Christians" who are behind the so-called "pro-life" movement would not support this, even though they enthusiastically support felonizing and imprisoning women and doctors for abortions, and even though they continually campaign to make contraception itself a similar crime.

Mandatory condom use has no hook for even the quasi-medical fraudulent objections of "abortifacient" with which the "Christians" slur every other form of contraception. Unless they're planning to take up "semen rights" - they'd look pretty silly marching with signs "Sperm is a person too" with photos of sperm with happy faces . . .

But nonetheless, you can bet your rubber that the "Christians" would quail and balk and even rage and scream at any effort to impinge on the sexual autonomy of MEN. All of a sudden, the "Christians" would be opposing government intervention in the bedroom.

Let's be real. This has nothing to do with abortion - if it did, abortion would already be history.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p c r
Compassionate and Conservative are polar opposites
10:09 PM on 04/29/2011
This makes sense. I say lets call our legislators and try to get it passed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
01:39 PM on 04/29/2011
anthonybrown
Become a fan (24)
Unfan (24)
5 hours ago (8:53 AM)
I am not a Republican­, but I would never be so uninformed as to claim not one American Republican politician cares for children. While it's convenient for you to make that claim, it simply isn't true.
_____________

anthonybrown
Become a fan (24)
Unfan (24)
4 hours ago (9:42 AM)
You must be real popular with your pregnant friends! I mean, every time they reference their "child" or "baby," you correct them and insist they say "fetus" instead.

Right?
_________________

Republican voting records speak for themselves. I do not need to prosecute republicans on the issues, especially caring for children and the elderly. They do quite well convicting themselves...

Why yes I am quite popular with my female friends, yup even those who are pregnant! Believe it or not I have about 3x the number of female friends as I male friends in life. I wonder why that is? Maybe because I care about them and recognize their RIGHT to choose what is best for their body, for their family, and for their future. I also care about the child after it is born...

Wow I know this is hard for you to believe given your posts here, and no I don't believe for a second you are NOT a Republican.
03:16 PM on 04/29/2011
Again, do you correct them when they refer to the "blob of cells" inside them as their "child" and insist they only say "fetus?" Because you do that a lot to people you disagree with. I was thinking you might have principles and be consistent and do it to them as well, but may have been giving far too much benefit of the doubt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
05:37 PM on 04/29/2011
Actually I'm a little more tactful than you would appear to be. I do not Inquire after the fetus I inquire about their health, how they are feeling... I ask if there is anything they need, anything I can do to help. I may ask "How is your pregnancy going?" etc... I refrain from calling a fetus a child and I refrain from addressing the fetus as anything period.

You may want to go read my responses again. I have never called a fetus a "blob of cells." You must be attributing someone elses post to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
09:37 PM on 04/29/2011
It is telling that you make the assumption I'm here to correct every pro-lifer of anything. It tells me you are quite the hypocrite, not to mention you do not even bother to make sure you are accusing the right person of saying the right thing. It speaks volumes to your diligence in fact checking. It speaks volumes that you choose to try and draw false attention to my character without even bothering to make sure you are quoting the right sayings.

I am simply here to stand up for womens rights. Whether it be my mother, my female family members, my female friends, or any woman in this country. After all if the_Tealiban and the Republicans get their way, they'll push women back to the dark ages.

You see the difference between you and I... I do not care that_pro-lifers have the belief they do. It does not bother me. What bothers me is that they try to_force that belief on others. This is indefensible.

This will be the last time I respond to you. Please to not post to me again.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
joeyfoto
“Écraser l'infamie!”
09:08 AM on 04/29/2011
This is the BIG TEST. Is Mitch Daniels really the ECONOMY-FIRST/non-Social-Issue Conservative?

We're about to find out. In economic terms, defunding Planned Parenthood, one of the world's most efficient providers of women's health services, along with turning away federal matching-money while denying thousands of women affordable care, is nuts.

The question before the country is: Is Governor Mitch Daniels just another right-wing religious zealot at home in a reactionary Republican Party or is he a Conservative leader? We'll see.
08:02 PM on 04/28/2011
This is just sad. Indiana is just backwards and always will be. If they want to keep the best and the brightest Hoosiers in the state, they need to offer their citizens more than the hope of possible poverty, increased communicable disease, difficulty in getting screened for cancer, or be prohibited from obtaining family planning services. What is awesome about living in a state where women are treated as second class citizens? People of poverty are also put at risk by this move. None of it makes a bit of sense and this will just be one more blow to the people who populate that state. If I was a woman living there now, I would leave. Why should I raise my family in a state that could care less about its female population? Or it's low income population? Or it's population of highly creative and talented folks? Or it's LBGT population? Or it's minorities? None of those sects matter to Indiana....I would urge the women of Indiana to leave...you shouldn't feel Indiana is the only place in the world to call home...I left that state and glad I don't call myself a hoosier...with stuff like this going on, I would be embarrased to say that I am.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
behindEnemyLines
Put down the talking point pamphlet.
05:41 PM on 04/28/2011
So what the problem with sending medicaid funds to another health service provider?
05:33 PM on 04/28/2011
For all of those kind enough to respond to me, I will try to answer you here all at once...

Look, reducing family planning access increasea abortion. Reducing solid sex education also increases abortion. These are facts,

But outlawing abortion does reduce abortion. Legalizing it increases unplanned pregnancies and abortions. These are also facts.

This does NOT mean abortion should be outlawed or even restricted in the least. But it does mean that fantasy worlds in which not one American woman chose not to get an abortion pre-Roe and not one person ever took a chance and used abortion as birth control post-Roe is simply that--fantasy.

Own it. That's all. Accept it as a negative consequence of legalized abortion which is outweighed by all the benefits of legalized abortion. But stop pretending that laws have NO impact on numbers. They do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TraceyES
07:24 PM on 04/28/2011
"But outlawing abortion does reduce abortion. Legalizing it increases unplanned pregnancie­s and abortions. These are also facts."

Sources, please.
08:23 PM on 04/28/2011
Center for Disease Control Statistics...

1974: 763,476 abortions
1979: 1,251,921 abortions
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p c r
Compassionate and Conservative are polar opposites
03:42 PM on 04/29/2011
Abortions happen whether they are legal or not. The difference is that if you do something illegal, you are not going to reprot it to the statistics bureaus. The only time you hear about illegal things is when they are found out because of complications. Abortions are done on the rich and listed on the OR schedule as "D&C for irregular periods". The rich fly out of the coutry for safe procedures.
There are not fewer abortions, only fewer abortions reported and a much higher risk of morbid and mortal complications.
07:44 PM on 04/29/2011
I could not reply to your other post, but I wish you had crafted a better response than to simply use foul vulgarity to describe me. I have not and will not respond in kind.
02:37 PM on 04/28/2011
What is the GOP obsession with planned parenthood & it's use of private funds for abortion which is 3% of it's services
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
04:43 PM on 04/28/2011
Well you know the GOP.. They are not happy if they are not in your life or your uterus.
05:52 PM on 04/28/2011
They believe in small govt in theory but when it comes to women health BIG govt is needed. Ironically I'm still waitng for a republican to tell me a republican president that actually practiced the "small govt" they desire
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cleverboots
05:03 PM on 04/28/2011
Control freaks?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p c r
Compassionate and Conservative are polar opposites
01:51 PM on 04/28/2011
The empathy and caring that the GOP is demonstrat­ing toward poor women truly warms me, although I think the heat is in direct correlatio­n with my rising ire. How dare they cut funding for cancer screenings and STD screening and treatment, not to mention access to affordable birth control and prenatal care in an effort to punish a charitable organiztio­n for performing a legal medical procedure!
Are the lives of these women just collateral damage? Do they really want STD's to go untreated and possibly rise to epidemic proportion­s? Do they not realize that by denyig affordable contracept­ion they are increasing the rate of unwanted, unplanned pregnancie­s that have a high probabilit­y of ending in abortion? Do they not realize that in addition to losing federal funding, they will also be faced with lawsuits filed by PP and women denied care?

What a wealthy state Indiana must be, to have money to waste on lawsuits, expensive treatment for advanced cancers and supporting all of the additional poor children resulting from denial of affordable care.
This is a case of right-wing­ers forcing their belief system on the general public to the detriment of many. Maybe they just h@te poor women.
The greatness of a country will never be judged by the way their wealthiest live, but instead by how their neediest are treated.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
04:45 PM on 04/28/2011
The GOP never thinks that far ahead. They are consumed by the "I want what I want, when I want it." Zero based thinking. They are determined to be in our bedrooms and in the uterus of the women of the country.
01:13 AM on 04/29/2011
You wrote that "The greatness of a country will never be judged by the way their wealthiest live, but instead by how their neediest are treated."

I wonder who could possibly be more needy than the youngest and smallest of our brothers and sisters?

Excellent point!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p c r
Compassionate and Conservative are polar opposites
03:27 PM on 04/29/2011
Globs of cells are neither people or our neediest. Our neediest are actual living breathing humans. You are so focused on assigning personhood on something that has the potential to be a human one day that it is scary.
Each of your sperm has that potential. Do you save each of them for an eggs, as so not to waste a life. The DNA in each sperm is unique.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
12:19 PM on 04/28/2011
The right only values a fetus until it is born, the post gestational child is just another person... Once the fetus graduates from being a (and I hate_to use the term) "PARASITE" and it (becomes a child) by taking its first breath of air and being no longer dependent on the mothers body. It is no longer important to the PRO-LIFE "CHRISTIAN­S."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
12:31 PM on 04/28/2011
They're neither pro-life or Christian in my eyes.

True caring takes looking at the big picture and fixing the issues behind the things that you don't like.
It takes actual commitment.

So far I've seen none from supporters of this bill.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
12:42 PM on 04/28/2011
To many of them confuse pro-choice with pro-abortion. I am not pro-abortion by any means. I do however realize that nothing and I do mean NOTHING is black and white in this world. Thus the need for pro-choice policies.
Hard Truth
Veritas vos Liberabit
01:03 PM on 04/28/2011
No, once a child is born it is the parent's responsibility to care for their child. I know the left runs from the term responsibility like the plague and looks for others to assume the responsibility for their actions. However, that is the truth, no matter how inconvenient it might be.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anonymous17
Thank You Fox News For Keeping us Infromed - T.P.
01:23 PM on 04/28/2011
So it is big government's responsibility to provide for the safety of a fetus, but not to provide for those who can not provide for themselves right?

Your conception of truth is an OPINION. It may be truth to you, however, until you can realize there are other viable OPINIONS in the world beyond yours, you are a shining example of what makes this world a a less tolerant place to live.
07:54 PM on 04/28/2011
so, if a couple's birth control fails, and they don't want that responsibility, too bad? how do you think unwanted kids are typically treated? or hey, if it's not a matter of want, but of ability, how do you think those kids are gonna get clothed and fed? the right runs from reality like a plague, and shrug their shoulders when confronted with their callousness.
photo
Barbara DeZan
Knowledge is Power
10:47 AM on 04/28/2011
Oh, brother.

When/if any state stops funding to Planned Parenthood, they will lose millions in Federal money.

Now, that makes sense, doesn't it?

Those Fed funds will go, instead, into the coffers and PP in those states will receive it Federally.

Republicans and zealots are a silly bunch.
10:34 AM on 04/28/2011
Wait! Where is the HuffPost article about dem Massachusetts state legislature voting to curb public union collective bargaining rights? Where is that phony outrage that we saw when Wisconsin was doing it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mydian01
two by two, hands of blue.
10:53 AM on 04/28/2011
im pretty sure that was genuine outrage, but i can see how you cant tell the difference anymore when you regurgitate so much faux noise and Koch astroturf.
11:03 AM on 04/28/2011
How do you figure when I rarely if ever watch cable news?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TraceyES
10:34 AM on 04/28/2011
Veeeery classy, Indiana. Instead of paying for birth control and preventive care for women with some paltry amount of tax dollars, if this passes, you'll now have to pay for advanced disease care and unwanted children with 10 times the amount of tax dollars.

Is it the water in Indiana that kills the logic and critical thinking part of the brain?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
12:11 PM on 04/28/2011
It certainly is creepy how much they want children to be born but how little they think about the care of these same kids.
Proper prenatal care is another huge concern - so many birth defects are preventable with simple care, such as prenatal vitamins.
Others are more manageable when the parent has time to prepare for a baby's special needs.

But now, Indiana, you'll be supporting the children whom you have damaged by taking this vital care away.

You're not really "saving" people (history has taught us that abortions will still happen, although they're likely to be a lot less safe), you're condemning a generation of young people with poor or under educated parents to leading less happy lives.

Some interesting links (just a couple, not even the tip of the iceberg):
http://onl­inelibrary­.wiley.com­/doi/10.11­96/annals.­1425.024/p­df
http://www.babys-corner.com/baby-care/some-of-the-causes-birth-defects
http://www.biomedexperts.com/Abstract.bme/8455820/Prenatal_malnutrition_and_development_of_the_brain
http://www.thejustcause.org/prenatal-malnutrition-can-increase-risk-of-diabetes/
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/128/7/1224.full
12:48 PM on 04/28/2011
As George Carlin said,

The right to life crowd only value fetus until birth. Life begins at conception and ends at birth. Unless you survive to military age then you are "Born again" ready to die once more.