States shift money from abortion providers
by Jared Bridges
February 14, 2007
The Los Angeles Times noted this week, somewhat disparagingly, that government funding for crisis pregnancy centers is on the rise in many states:
At least eight states — including Florida, Missouri and Pennsylvania — use public funds to subsidize crisis pregnancy centers, Christian homes for unwed mothers and other programs explicitly designed to steer women away from abortion. As a condition of the grants, counselors are often barred from referring women to any clinic that provides abortions; in some cases, they may not discuss contraception either.
Most states still spend far more money subsidizing comprehensive family planning, but the flow of tax dollars to antiabortion groups has surged in recent months, as programs have taken effect in Texas and Minnesota.
Which group doesn’t like this trend of using state funds to encourage women not to have abortions? It’s none other than the number one foe of unplanned childhood everywhere — Planned Parenthood. The nation’s leading abortion provider is apparently sour on its newfound competition:
In 2005, Texas lawmakers redirected $25 million that was to have gone to Planned Parenthood over two years. Most went instead to primary-care health clinics (which provide contraception but not abortion). But $5 million of the money was set aside for antiabortion centers that do not provide medical care and will not refer clients to clinics that prescribe birth control.
To deal with its 62% budget cut, the Planned Parenthood clinic in downtown Austin began charging for services long offered free to low-income women. Since the fees took effect, the clinic has distributed 40% fewer birth control pills and has conducted 50% fewer Pap smears to screen for cervical cancer. Several thousand patients have stopped coming.
While the article makes Planned Parenthood seem as if it were ready to cut off the heat and make its staff work for free, it does point out that the national organization did receive over $280 million in public funds last year — hardly a pittance. The article quotes Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, as saying, “It’s reprehensible that taxpayer dollars are going to organizations that regularly and deliberately deceive women.”
Now, that’s a statement we can all agree with.
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
My own feeling is that in order to reduce abortions to the absolute minimum, it is essential that they remain legal.
We have to change the culture, and that means better sex education, more availablity of contraception and a focus on changing people’s hearts and minds.
There are websites you can go to now to learn the “do-it-yourself” method of abortion. To my mind, the thought of woman resorting to this is frighetening.

By: Suricou Raven | February 16, 2007 at 6:11 am
Those ‘abortion providers’ provide many other services in addition to abortion. If campaigners make abortion the decisive issue on where funding goes, then they will end up cutting funding for contraceptive services and vital medical services – in this case, pap smear testing. There is a similar international situation – many of the more effective organisations trying to limit the spread of HIV also provide abortion services, and so lose USAID.
A similar situation also exists with regard to prostitution – Brazil had to turn down US funding a few years ago because one condition for accepting it would be criminalising prostitution, which would mean ending the country’s very successful STI-testing-and-condom-promotion program.
This is the problem with the self-proclaimed moral superiors that now dominate pro-life. They have raised their goal of protecting the embryo/fetus/baby from just a good thing to the ultimate, vital moral act that defines them – and they will happily sacrifice the health, rights, and sometimes lives of women – as well as public health – in persuit of their eventual aim of preventing every single abortion. They are so convinced they are the very definition of ‘Good’ they cannot see the harm they cause.