Women’s Health and the Budget
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-04-13/women%E2%80%99s-health-and-budget
The House votes tomorrow on the budget deal struck late last Friday for funding the government for the balance of fiscal 2011. Negotiations on the $1 trillion dollar plan nearly collapsed over two items: federal funding for Planned Parenthood health services and the question of whether the DC could use it own revenues to help low income women pay for abortions. Given the size of the overall budget, the dollars involved were minuscule, but the questions are at the heart of national social policy debate. Join us to talk about women's health and the budget.
Guests
Sarah Brown
ceo, The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unwanted Pregnancy
Marjorie Dannenfelser
president, Susan B. Anthony List
Laura Meckler
White House correspondent, The Wall Street Journal.
Cecile Richards
president, Planned Parenthood
Program Highlights
In last week's down-to-the-wire 2011 federal budget brawl, two issues related to women's health became major points of contention: disagreement over federal funds for Planned Parenthood and the question of whether D.C. should be allowed to use its own money to help women pay for abortions.
The BBC's Katty Kay, sitting in for Diane Rehm, explored why women's health issues figured so prominently in the national budget debate.
"If we think back to the health care debate, abortion was a huge issue there that threatened to sink the entire Obama health care plan," said the Wall Street Journal's Laura Meckler. "There are a group of social conservatives in Congress who feel very, very strongly about this issue, and they're willing to push it all the way to the mat."
One Republican proposal during the Congressional budget debate would have stripped Planned Parenthood of all federal funding; another sought to restore a ban on the District of Columbia using local money to fund abortions. While the Planned Parenthood proposal is now off the table, the proposed D.C. ban is the compromise Congress will eventually vote on, Meckler said.
Central to the Republican argument in favor of stripping Planned Parenthood's funding is the fact that the provider performs abortions. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, said that abortion is "not a small part" of what Planned Parenthood does and that the budget debate "...has been over whether we should be supporting the number one abortion provider in the nation."
Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said that 97 percent of the organization's services are preventive care, including breast exams, STD screenings, and birth control. "One of the problems in America is that there is very little access to affordable family planning. And, in fact, even health centers, like Planned Parenthood or other providers who provide family planning through federal programs, have to raise outside private dollars to help supplement those services because the reimbursement rates are so low, they don't even begin to pay for the cost of family planning in America," Richards said.
Sarah Brown of The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unwanted Pregnancy asked Richards how she could guarantee that the organization never used federal funds to facilitate abortion services, or, put another way, address the issue of "fungibility."
"For more than 30 years, federal funds have been strictly prohibited from paying for any abortion services. And that's true, again, not only for Planned Parenthood, but all hospitals in America. We all operate under the same regulation, and the federal funds that are provided to Planned Parenthood are reimbursed," Richards said.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
When I was in college I went to planned parenthood for a check up and to get advice on birth control. I think that places like Planned parenthood are essential, especially for young and lower income women and it would be a shame for our government to cut such a program. I truly believe in preventive care and if women can go to planned parenthood to get counseling and receive birth control then they can also prevent the process of an unwanted pregnancies and the emotional and psychological repercussions of getting an abortion. Thank you planned parenthood... someone has to be there for women and men seeking guidance.
Alessia Solari
Fabulous Expate. Fabulous. I'm sure the Speaker of the House will stand up right away.
Abortion has nothing to do with women's health. Just the title of this segment demonstrates the huge bias of the assumptions.
I wanted to add to this discussion about Planned Parenthood and the reality of who cannot receive health care benefits.
I am a 30 year old female. I have been a user of Planned Parenthood for the past 8 years. Through Planned Parenthood, I have received birth control, various blood tests and std testing, pap smears and examines routinely. I was diagnosed with a pre existing condition (a personality disorder), which has prevented me from receiving individual health care coverage for the past 8 years. I am not alone in this; there are many woman and men who have been diagnosed with a pre existing condition(s) that prevents them from receiving health care coverage; and many of them turn to services like Planned Parenthood.
I feel it is crucial to make the public aware that there are deeper issues and reasons tied to some of users of Planned Parenthood services. Other people such as myself, who are denied health care coverage, have turned to Planned Parenthood services. My hope is that the government will turn there attention to this dilemma.
~Thank you
The issue isn't JUST funding or defunding Planned Parenthood. It's much more complicated than that. a) Why do we fund Planned Parenthood clinics with tax dollars and not fund other abortion providers? What is it about Planned Parenthood that makes it an organization that we as Americans need to fund? What is it about other abortion clinics that preclude THEM from receiving taxpayer funding? If I was the abortion provider down the block, I'd be a little miffed about this. And why are we facing this debate now? Why such opposition now as opposed to any other time? Because teachers are being laid off, homes are being foreclosed, big banks are being bailed out, but consumers are not. It's more than a little aggravating that our government will pay for women to abort their children and call it reproductive "healthcare" all the while refusing to earmark any allocated tax money to keep teachers in schools. In the overwhelming scheme of things, we really aren't interested in paying for women's abortions.
(more)
b) Second to all that is the issue of Planned Parenthood's continual, consistent noncompliance with laws regarding/regulating abortion -- and there aren't many so this shouldn't be terribly difficult for them to do. The undercover investigations recently released depict widespread noncompliance. This is not about providing abortion as a government-funded service so much as finding a way to disallow illegal activities from being funded by American taxpayers. Why do we have clinic employees -- managers, in fact -- on tape telling pimps where to go to get their 14-year-old sex slaves abortions? "Go down the street to the other clinic, the one that isn't Planned Parenthood, because they are even more willing to look the other way than we are." I see. Hmmmm. So we know that Planned Parenthood doesn't comply with the laws based on this expose, but the guy down the street is even more noncompliant so go over there with your pregnant underage prostitutes? Really?
If you believe in abortion, fine. That's your right. But do you also believe in allowing criminal activity at abortion clinics to continue and do you want to pay for it, too? And do you want to make those who oppose abortion for religious reasons pay for it? Can we not at least discuss an opt-out measure?
that was one of margaret sanger's original, published, goals. she was an extreme racist and founder of planned parenthood.
those of us who are against aborting ANY babies are 1. willing to help care for them and their mothers, and 2. we don't care what color they are!
anyone who brings up color in this argument is trying to throw gasoline on a fire, and actually is the racist one.
Megan Green, and others like her, need a safe place to go for healthcare. If Planned Parenthood were an organization that offers what she described and did not also perform abortions, I believe we could solve this dilemma. Let the other clinics perform abortions for women who desire them, and let us fund Planned Parenthood's healthcare initiatives (after they undergo massive reforms and are punished for their noncompliance).
glad to see you here, ALL! that is the point i was trying to make. use of the word, "health," creates/continues a paradigm that planned parenthood is only looking out for the good. it is not: some of its practices are awful. that is why there is so much opposition to it and 59% don't want to fund it at all. let it go out in the marketplace and find its own money. i am sure its supporters will provide dollars to keep it running if THEY believe in it and its mission.
Megan Hoyt do you believe government should stop reimbursing hospitals and private practice physicians for medicaid and medicare patients who also provide abortions?
I think it's quite telling how almost all of the below comments from people who are obviously pro-abortion have put all of the pro-lifers into one tiny little box labeled "close minded". They insinuate that all pro-lifers think exactly the same and that the pro-lifers are trying to speak for everyone else. That's going to be really difficult when this broadcast gave Cecile Richardson a HUGE platform and gave Marjorie Dannenfelser about 1 minute total. Should have known NPR wouldn't give equal time to a guest they are so clearly biased against. Kudos to Marjorie...you are a BRAVE woman and I commend you for coming up against the Goliath abortion provider Planned Parenthood. Let's not forget who defeated Goliath...someone who was much smaller (or, perhaps, did not get equal airtime :)
Considering that a woman's right to abortion was affirmed in the context of a right to privacy, then why is something as personal and private as a woman facing the dangers and rigors of pregnancy and childbirth a matter appropriate for being controlled by politicans or the results of public opinion polls?
It seems outlandish to me that anyone other than a pregnant woman should have any power to affect what that woman decides to do.
The guest from the Susan B. Anthony list was just caustic and full of hatred. Obviously, she's been brainwashed by a fundamentalist movement to level of ignorance which just utterly amazing in this day and age (could she BE more ignorant??). I was glad to listen as the other guests ate her lunch just by discussing what PP is and what it does in very comprehensive terms. It's people like her who perpetuate the oppression of low income people in the U.S. you GO, PP!
Yes, commenter, I believe that since abortion is a practice that many Americans are opposed to on ethical grounds, it should not be funded for rich or poor through our citizens' tax dollars.
Before Roe v. Wade, women facing ectopic pregnancies received abortions, and women facing medical emergencies (when delaying cancer treatment until the baby was born would mean certain death, for example) were given the option of aborting. I believe going back to at least that level of taxpayer-funded abortion for those on medicaid would reduce the amount of abortions I am forced to pay for to a reasonable amount, done for a reasonable purpose -- to reduce the risk of death of the mom based on medical causes that she and her doctor are able to assess. No more coercion of minors by older boyfriends, no more abortion used as birth control for reckless teenagers and college students engaging in recreational sex. That would be win enough for me at the end of the day for this intensely complicated issue.
Rice2, I was unable to hear the show, unfortunately, but just because the woman from Susan B. Anthony (not familiar with that organization) was not as articulate as she could have been or was from a fundamentalist background does not negate the Planned Parenthood funded Guttmacher Institute's research and abortion stats. According to Guttmacher, around 30% of all Americans (wish it was higher) are opposed to abortion. Many of us are from organizations like Feminists for Life, PAGAL (Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians), and Democrats for Life. If NPR decided to, they could have found a spokesperson from one of these organizations to better articulate the pro-life belief that Planned Parenthood should not be funded as long as it is not complying with the law and, in my opinion, so long as they perform abortions. Abortion on demand would perhaps be a better way to put it. Women who get multiple abortions because they are careless with their sexuality are using the money of people like me who are against abortion on moral grounds to kill their unborn children. Can you understand why I might be uncomfortable with that? Especially when I know there are many organizations standing ready to assist underprivileged women who want to keep their babies but feel they can't afford to care for them. We need to take all the spin out of the arguments and stop politicizing the issue in order to fix this, I think. I say that as a political independent.
Abortion aside, one point that was misconstrued on today’s show is that Planned Parenthood does not provide primary health care services to women and their president was wrong when she said that there are no other healthcare resources for uninsured women. I find it hard to believe that she is not aware that there are healthcare resources all over the country for women (and men and children): Community health centers.
Community health centers operate 7,900 locations, urban and rural, serving more than 20 million patients, the majority who have low income, are uninsured or publicly insured, and are minorities. Health centers provide preventive services such as immunizations, health education, mammograms, pap smears, and other screenings. They meet or exceed nationally accepted practice standards for treatment of chronic conditions and are models for screening, diagnosing, and managing chronic conditions such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, asthma, depression, cancer, and HIV. Health centers’ efforts have led to improved health outcomes and lowered the cost of treating patients with chronic illness. In addition, low-income women seeking care at health centers experience lower rates of low birth weight babies. Heart disease is the number one killer of women in the U.S. Planned Parenthood does not provide care for heart disease. Nor do they provide care for diabetes, asthma, respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease, or the flu. Community health services provide these services and more. Many also provide dental care and behavioral health services. Under the new budget, funding for community health centers is being cut $600 million dollars. Unless rectified, this major reduction will - in this year alone - negate the ability to provide basic health care services to over 5 million Americans, and will seriously undermine the ability of health centers to provide services to 40 million people by 2015 - a cornerstone of the health reform bill passed last year.
Reprehensible and naive comments. Pre-Roe, women died in back ally abortions. Sounds like the good old days to me. Why don't we just rescind voting rights for women while we're at it.
The majority of abortions are not performed so people can run around having sex with whomever they like, but this myth conveniently allows those opposed to a woman's right to choose a medical procedure to deride this group, and assuage any concern for a women's health or safety (well, you know, if they weren't screwing around, they probably wouldn't have needed the services anyway...if they die, are bankrupted, or end up with a child they can't care for, I guess that's their punishment for sining.)
Getting to the point of the show, however, PP may not be the only group out there, but they have, and do, make a difference (which is a bitter pill for those opposed to choice to swallow.) They provide so much more than abortions, but I suppose hate the sinner, eh.
Honestly, I can't wait to finish med school, so I can provide this needed service for women (and continue to fight against intolerance and patriarchal oppression.)
If by Goliath you mean the massive Right wing organizations that continue to push women back into dark corners, and advocate for denial of basic medical care for all but WASPs, yup. NPR is anything but biased, but I suppose slander is a convenient way of eliminating points of view that you don't like (and that try to present facts - those stubborn things with a well-known liberal bias.)
Thank you, Trustwomen. Those who describe themselves as "pro-life" use a romantic brush to paint themselves as omniscient holders of truth and rightness. But they have also painted their eyes shut to hunger and poverty in the name of self responsibility and individuality and their ears shut to their illogical rhetoric. Life is just not that simple.
JLMJ, wow...again...deciding what "pro-lifers" believe and don't believe. I believe in feeding the hungry, fighting poverty, AND that every child, born and unborn, has the right to live. Imagine that. I am not right-wing or left wing. I am not Republican, a Tea Party member, or a Democrat. Ugh. You're going to have to make a new box for me! I just don't fit any of your stereotypes!
Marjorie,
Stop. Now. Please. Your belief system is blinding you to the fact that you are endorsing candidates for our government that are destroying the fabric of reasonable legislation in our country. If you are so against murder funded, or potentially funded, by our government, why aren't you protesting our military? They kill far more real live human beings than any other US taxpayer organization on the planet. How Pro-Life is that? Yet you spend all your energy and time trying to cripple the only organization in our country that EDUCATES, and distributes contraception to women, provides them with affordable health care and testing for STD's. Please stop. Change your focus to something that really matters. Something that affects real living, walking, human beings by the hundreds of thousands. Funding for the Pentagon and weapons. Could you imagine the real change your movement could bring to this planet if you just shifted your focus to the murder of real people instead of developing fetuses? I pray you consider this. Because the only thing you're accomplishing now is putting dangerous people like Michelle Bachman into office and taking away access to inexpensive health care for millions of women. And that's real. Time to evolve Marjorie, leave other people alone and shift your attention to something that really matters. Peace
expate stated:
"I wonder why men who are against abortion try to interfere with a woman's right to choose. If the goal is to reduce the number of abortions, they should be promoting vasectomies for men. The cost is about the same as an abortion, the risks are not great, and the procedure is reversible (not to mention that men can cheaply freeze sperm relative to the cost of freezing eggs).
I call for men to step up, bend over, and get involved in family planning. Reduce the amount of sperm in circulation."
Expate: Have you ever stop to think that they realize it is a human being and that they want that child to have a life not destroy it?
shram23
Do not understand your logic when comparing, destroying a helpless live with the miltary. I believe that your misunderstanding is causing you to see things so unclearly.
You mention "our miltary is killing people". Well what do you think a miltary is for, meal on wheels? A miltary is trained to killed, to protect us, honey.
If it was not for the US Miltary, we would be living under communism, nazis,etc.
Why don't you read some history about our miltary. You may have not been here for some of there actions or some of the blood they shed.
shram23
Do not understand your logic when comparing, destroying a helpless live with the miltary. I believe that your misunderstanding is causing you to see things so unclearly.
You mention "our miltary is killing people". Well what do you think a miltary is for, meal on wheels? A miltary is trained to killed, to protect us, honey.
If it was not for the US Miltary, we would be living under communism, nazis,etc.
Why don't you read some history about our miltary. You may have not been here for some of there actions or some of the blood they shed.
That woman Marjorie seemed to be creating her statistics out of the air. How can the abortion rate be rising if clinics are being closed due to policitcal pressure, unless she's referring to that of PP. That can only be because there's no where elste to go. A couple of evenings ago, the pro-life catholic Stephen Colbert cited that among PP's services, only 3% goes for abortion servies, as opposed to the 33% Marjorie claims.
One might also wonder if Marjorie practices contraception, because if she were fruitful and multiplying, she wouldn't have time for making political hay out of the fallacies she states.
Trustwomen:
So you can't wait to get out of medical school to help all those women get an abortion. Sounds to me it more for the money.There is a heck of lot of money to make in abortion services. The later the baby stage, the more the income Yea those Republicans love only the rich. Heard it before from those Dem/libs. But these same people doing the critizing love the same things. Bunch of hypocrites.
It would appear that this is the first step in dismanteling Roe v Wade. Our world is reverting to a wealthy white male dominated world and it's frightening what these guys will do to maintain power and control.
I used PP when I was in high school, lots of us did. We needed health care and didn't dare talk about it with our parents. Thankfully this organization was there. What shall we do with scared, but smart teens, and people unable to afford "traditional" medicine? Kick them to the curb? Let them be sick? Tell them to get out of the way and die? Is it really smart to bring more babies into families that are financially or emotionally unable to care for them?
Where are men's reproductive health issues in this discussion anyway? How come they are always talking about us. Let's talk about them for a change. I agree with one of the earlier writers: Let men start taking reproductive health responsibility and get vasectomies. I can only wonder what they would think if women started dictating to them. Keep your hands, your morality, your politics and your religion off of our bodies. This isn't a moral issue, it is a medical one. End of discussion.
All opinions welcome? Seriously, why was the one guest who reduced EVERY issue down to abortion invited to participate in this discussion? Do not chalk it up to being representative. If you do that, then you must have the other extreme as a guest -- those who abhor people who have babies; I think, pre-Obama, they were called birthers. (FYI, I am talking, in my experience, gay men who opposed children being born. I'm not kidding. They are out there.)
I for one cannot understand why US Tax dollars are going to faith based programs and organizations. The founding fathers may have fowled a few things up. But they were pretty clear about separation of church and state and for good reasons.
So, wouldn't the religious right be using tax dollars to get there message out just being guests on NPR.
That's Outrageous I know.
I think it is high time ordinary Citizens rise up and boot the Christian Right to the curb, where, they belong! I can not believe Congress allows this little gathering of nuts to, bully them all in the corner Republican and Democrat alike.
Robin McCrory
Moses Lake, WA
Well said Robin.