• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

Planned Parenthood Donations Up 500 Percent After Budget Fight

The social conservatives’ war against Planned Parenthood seems to have backfired:

Online gifts to Planned Parenthood have surged by 500 percent since Republicans passed a budget amendment stripping the group of its federal funding.

NARAL Pro-Choice America’s email activist list grew by 1,000 subscribers per day at the height of the budget debate.

With the budget battle putting women’s health issues front and center, reproductive health groups tell POLITICO they’ve seen an unprecedented surge in activism at a time when many supporters had grown complacent, less fazed by legislative threats now that a president who supports abortion rights is at the helm.

(…)

To be sure, abortion rights advocates did not score a complete win as Obama reinstated a provision that prevents the District of Columbia from spending local tax dollars on abortion services. The president had lifted the ban shortly after taking office.

But in interviews with POLITICO, leaders of top reproductive health groups said this battle was a near 180-degree turn from their lobbying experience during health reform, with a surge in activism and financial support.

They chalk up the spike to two key factors: a tangible issue around which to organize and a more aggressive, coordinated grass-roots strategy. Ironically, it was Rep. Mike Pence’s pointed attack on Planned Parenthood that seemed to have awakened the group’s supporters.

“If the federal budget proposal had simply said, ‘We’re going to eliminate family planning funding,’ I don’t think people would have been as concerned,” said Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards. “But they literally went after Planned Parenthood. For the first time, I think, the next generation of pro-choice women and men saw that the attack was real. It would affect their lives. It wasn’t hypothetical like last year’s debate; it really connected the personal with the political.”

What this means, of course, is that after a decade or more in which it took a back seat to issues like war, terrorism, and the economy, the abortion debate appears to be heating up again. I’m sure it will be just as unproductive as it was the last time.

 

Related Posts:

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Jay says:

    Good, now that donations are up, it’s even more of a reason to stop providing them with taxpayer dollars.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

  2. Again, I don’t have a problem with that but it’s only $ 300,000,000, I am not an abortion fanatic, and there are bigger battles to fight

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. DC Loser says:

    This is what the social warriors wanted. I’m sure NPR will see a large increase in pledges this year also.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Tim says:

    It’s not a war against anybody, it’s a matter of not using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions. By the way, what’s with this ‘war’ talk? Didn’t you hear about the New Civility? Oh, wait. That only applies to the right. Carry on.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  5. Boyd says:

    My first reaction mirror’s Jay’s above. Like most people, I believe that there are often (or even usually) better alternatives to abortion, but I’m not an absolutist on the subject. My problem with using my tax dollars for abortion is not that it’s for abortion, but it’s my tax dollars.

    I’m perfectly happy for people to donate their own money for social programs they support. That’s the way it’s supposed to be done, IMHO.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  6. Boyd says:

    Note to self: The time you don’t think you need to reread your comment before you post it is the time you’ll miss an error. “Mirrors,” not “mirror’s.”

    Sheesh.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. RedneckBob says:

    Federal tax dollars DO NOT FUND abortions! See the Hyde Amendment and if you ask Planned Parenthood, the fee is between $350 and $900 dollars.

    There are many reasons it should be kept legal:

    1. Laws against abortion kill women.
    2. Legal abortions protect women’s health.
    3. A woman is more than a fetus.
    4. Being a mother is just one option for women.
    5. Outlawing abortion is discriminatory.
    6. Compulsory pregnancy laws are incompatible with a free society.
    7. Outlaw abortion, and more children will bear children.
    8. The Untruth: “Every child a wanted child.”
    9. Choice is good for families.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  8. matt says:

    It’s not a war against anybody, it’s a matter of not using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions.

    Hey buddy I suggest you look up this thing called the Hyde amendment. Yeah I know it’s a lot of words and words are tough to digest but give it a try. TLDR : Federal funding for abortion is already banned so there are no federal money going for abortions anyway. Great now that we solved your objections lets move on to the next war…

    Personally I live PP as it providers not only provide my fiancee with her birth control at reasonable prices (the only option in my area of roughly +300k people). PP also provides a great deal of womens and mens health care screening at affordable rates.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  9. matt says:

    live = love

    lul

    Oh and BTW like most planned parenthoods my local PP doesn’t provide abortion related services…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. JKB says:

    Again, I don’t have a problem with that but it’s only $ 300,000,000, I am not an abortion fanatic, and there are bigger battles to fight

    There is no amount to small to save when you are trying to dig yourself out of debt. This is the foolish mistake most overextenders make in justifying their continued waste of money and then they are confused why they can’t get out of debt. You have to take the long view and understand that every dollar counts toward cutting down the debt even when that debt is a few trillion.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. William says:

    A lot of you keep mentioning you have a problem paying for abortions with your tax money. You ARE NOT paying for abortions with your tax money. That is illegal. The tax money goes to birth control, etc. But NOT to abortions.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. sam says:

    Next up: House bill HR-1001:

    “It shall be illegal to donate any funds to any organization that inteferes with the rights of blastocystians of the United States.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Boyd says:

    I first came to true understanding of the fungible nature of money when I saw my young adult son spending money on a big screen TV, over-the-top sound system and multiple console gaming systems while I was helping him make payments on his car.

    The same is true for Planned Parenthood’s use of government money for health services, freeing up donated money to pay for abortions. And I confess, I should further extend my comment that I object to how Planned Parenthood operates in Washington, DC, to be specific to this discussion.

    And lastly, anything that gets Eleanor Holmes Norton so upset immediately strikes me as a good thing on its face.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Social Services > Useless War says:

    We were spending Planned Parenthood’s entire annual budget every week in Lybia. People’s complaints that it “isn’t about abortion it’s about my tax dollars” either comes from ignorance or lies.

    You don’t get to opt out of paying for social services any more than I had the choice to opt out of paying for:
    100,000+ Civilian Deaths in Iraq or Pakistani civilian deaths from drone strikes or propping up dictators like Mubarak. Low cost healthcare and yes, family planning, is far more important than any of these things. I don’t remember ever having a choice in paying for the murder of innocent people.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. matt says:

    I can’t comment for all planned parent hoods but the ones I’ve been to in Illinois and Texas require you to pay the full price for the abortion. Although in Illinois the state will help you out if you’re a low income earner..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. matt says:

    I dare to point out that the only location in Texas is one of them in Houston..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. matt says:

    Only location I’ve personally been to.. Didn’t quite state that the way I wanted :(

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Boyd says:

    So, Mr. Anonymous Poster, we’re not allowed to have an opinion on individual parts of the federal budget? We can’t complain about how our money is spent?

    And why do you assume that people who oppose federal funding for Planned Parenthood support spending money on our current engagement in Libya? One does not necessarily flow from the other.

    And lastly, who said anything about opting out of paying for anything? Granted, I said I don’t want my tax dollars being spent, but that’s more shorthand for “don’t spend federal money on a program, and let those who support it spend their money on it directly.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. mantis says:

    The same is true for Planned Parenthood’s use of government money for health services, freeing up donated money to pay for abortions.

    Bullshit. If you want an abortion at Planned Parenthood, you pay for it.

    Why does the right have to lie about everything, all the time?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Boyd says:

    Bullshit. If you want an abortion at Planned Parenthood, you pay for it.

    I guess I’m mistaken, mantis, since you so eloquently proved my statement false, rather than merely proclaiming something as fact without any proof.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. matt says:

    Like I said earlier costs depend on your state as some states do provide funds to help low income people.

    Insert your location on the official Planned Parenthood site and you can see for yourself.

    Feel free to continue to make up fact free claims and then criticize others for making “fact free” claims counter to yours.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. Victor says:

    Impoverishing people now is worse than spending in the long view. Herbert Hoover cut spending and when wall street crashed he asked for volunteerism to help make up the loss. The result? The Great Depression. Cutting funding for human services doesn’t work.

    Additionally, as other posters have said, PP doesn’t use taxpayer money on abortions. Boyd, you ask for a citation and there’s one all the way at the top from RedneckBob. PP helps millions of poor women get the basic services they need. Or are we too broke for healthy women? But not too broke for war?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  23. soleblues says:

    And lastly, who said anything about opting out of paying for anything? Granted, I said I don’t want my tax dollars being spent, but that’s more shorthand for “don’t spend federal money on a program, and let those who support it spend their money on it directly.”

    What exactly is the difference? Tax dollars are used to pay for things. Changing the words you used doesn’t exactly change the meaning of your statement.

    So, Mr. Anonymous Poster, we’re not allowed to have an opinion on individual parts of the federal budget? We can’t complain about how our money is spent?

    Why is it ok for you to have an opinion about the budget, but not anyone else? Anon is stating he’d rather not see tax dollars be used to support multiple wars, propping up dictators, etc. You stated you’d rather not see tax dollars be used to help people stay healthy, prevent the spread of diseases, prevent unwanted pregnancies and prevent cancer. Both opinions. Why is yours ok, but not his?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. mantis says:

    I guess I’m mistaken, mantis, since you so eloquently proved my statement false, rather than merely proclaiming something as fact without any proof.

    You mean like you did, by claiming that government funds paid for abortions?

    Call up Planned Parenthood, and see if you can get a free abortion. I’m actually familiar with these clinics. Are you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. Boyd says:

    @mantis:
    From the Planned Parenthood web page for their Washington DC Center:

    “Fees for services are based on your household income.”

    So, if fees are reduced or eliminated for low-income women, who makes up the difference? Somebody somewhere has to subsidize the procedure. So even if it’s not tax dollars that are used to subsidize the abortion, the fungibility of money still means that more money is available because of the taxpayer subsidy to Planned Parenthood in DC.

    So I guess you’re not as familiar with Planned Parenthood as you thought, eh mantis?

    @soleblues:

    Why is yours ok, but not his?

    In the context of a post about funding for Planned Parenthood, Mr. Anonymous brought in a subject from left field and “magically” tied a given opinion that he doesn’t like on the irrelevant subject to the one we’re discussing.

    I suppose I was too vague in my earlier statement, for which I apologize. I do that way too often.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. soleblues says:

    @Boyd: Regarding assistance for low-income women:

    http://www.lilithfund.org/

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. mantis says:

    From the Planned Parenthood web page for their Washington DC Center:

    “Fees for services are based on your household income.”

    That’s the general health services page, which doesn’t include abortions. When you look at theAbortion Services page (click on “Abortion Services on the right-hand menu), the message is different:

    Please contact this health center for abortion services pricing information.

    Payment is expected at time of service unless other arrangements have been previously made.

    Abortion services may be covered by your insurance. If you want to use your insurance, please be sure to bring in your insurance information at the time of your visit.

    No mention of discounts based on income. Again, why do you rightwingers have to lie about everything?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. JoeMoe says:

    Republicans are a deeply insecure, panic stricken group of latent racists. Abortion services constitute 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services. You need to relax and refocus your hate on homosexuals or foreigners.

    Funny how distracted people get when abortion or gay marriage is mentioned. It reminds me of when my baby nephew is crying. I jingle some keys and he smiles. Mention abortion and people who have absolutely no experience, lose their mind. Mention the billions that Faith Based Initiatives receive from the government, and Republicans change the subject.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. Boyd says:

    @mantis:

    Again, why do you rightwingers have to lie about everything?

    Oh, so I’m lying, but what’s your motivation for leaving out how abortions are subsidized? Does that not come from donations? You’re saying that funds that are funneled through organizations such as Fund Abortion Now to Planned Parenthood to pay for abortions don’t count?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Boyd says:

    To be clear, my previous sentence should have started, “Are you saying…” Sorry for my unclear wording, because I sure don’t want to put words in your mouth, mantis.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. Matty says:

    In the context of a post about funding for Planned Parenthood, Mr. Anonymous brought in a subject from left field and “magically” tied a given opinion that he doesn’t like on the irrelevant subject to the one we’re discussing.

    Since Planned Parenthood is about the budget, and since you mentioned the budget in your comments, Anon didn’t really commit any logical fallacies when he tied it to the budget regarding Planned Parenthood. So it’s not really magic, it’s context and associated topics.

    Since you were okay with the budget itself being a talking point, you need to be okay with introducing everything involved with it that can impact the topic. It would be a logical fallacy to ignore these points.

    Beyond that, your link was not a real link, and the simplified address was not to Planned Parenthood. For DC, the website specifically states you may find coverage through insurance. I didn’t look in depth, so feel free to show me information from Planned Parenthood that states the cost. Either way, it is never a federal cost regarding abortion, so that’s an important fact.

    It’s very important to understand the art of arguing if you intend to understand politics and why things are right and wrong. That’s not an opinion, either.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. Matty says:

    Oh, so I’m lying, but what’s your motivation for leaving out how abortions are subsidized? Does that not come from donations? You’re saying that funds that are funneled through organizations such as Fund Abortion Now to Planned Parenthood to pay for abortions don’t count?

    Those funds aren’t federal. They come from people who support abortions. The services offered by planned parenthood are beyond just abortions. You may continue to fight against them if you believe contraception, sti testing, general sexual education, rape assistance and other services are not important. If you do fight against those, however, you are undeniably bigoted and anti-woman. That displays a gross lack of understanding of equality, and reinforces the white male power user.

    America can’t afford to fight a war on 4 fronts, but if they didn’t fight, they could afford to look after their citizens with comprehensive care. If you don’t agree with that care, you don’t need to participate.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. mantis says:

    Oh, so I’m lying, but what’s your motivation for leaving out how abortions are subsidized?

    Because they aren’t subsidized by the government, and since they are paid for by external sources (the patient or through private abortion assistance), they have zero impact on the use of government funds.

    Does that not come from donations? You’re saying that funds that are funneled through organizations such as Fund Abortion Now to Planned Parenthood to pay for abortions don’t count?

    Count for what? My point is that abortions at Planned Parenthood are paid for by the patient, not the government. Whether that patient has help from external sources is irrelevant. Those sources are paying to help women get abortions. They aren’t giving money to Planned Parenthood that would be used for other things if not abortions. Your fungibility argument is irrelevant. I was responding to that argument. You now want to move the goalposts. Typical.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. matt says:

    Your Washington DC example also uses local tax payer money not federal money to assist low income women. Of course you know this because as part of the budget deal DC will no longer be able to use locally raised taxes to help fund local low income abortions.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. Boyd says:

    @Matty
    I’m apparently still not making it clear. Let me emphasize the appropriate point:

    Mr. Anonymous brought in a subject from left field and “magically” tied a given opinion that he doesn’t like on the irrelevant subject to the one we’re discussing.

    What he did was assume that everyone who opposes taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood in DC is in favor of funding for our current military activities in and around Libya. This is the logical fallacy, because it’s, in fact, not true.

    Beyond that, your link was not a real link, and the simplified address was not to Planned Parenthood.

    I’m not sure what this means, because the link goes to the page for the Planned Parenthood DC Center on the PlannedParenthood.org web site.

    Those funds aren’t federal.

    Please see my previous comments re: fungibility.

    @mantis:

    My point is that abortions at Planned Parenthood are paid for by the patient, not the government. Whether that patient has help from external sources is irrelevant.

    Ah, now we’re getting to the meat of the matter! We’re never going to agree on this, so I’m certainly not going to try to convince you, but here’s my point: The private funds that are donated for abortions through any number of organizations all come from the same source, and are for the same services: assisting low-income women with pregnancy-related expenses. Multiple organizations merely disguise the fact that the same money is coming from the same sources ultimately to the same recipients (Planned Parenthood of DC in this case). When you add taxpayer money into the mix, it frees up more private money to pay for abortions. That’s where the fungibility argument comes into the discussion.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  36. mantis says:

    The private funds that are donated for abortions through any number of organizations all come from the same source, and are for the same services: assisting low-income women with pregnancy-related expenses.

    Prove it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  37. MikeF says:

    Hey Boyd, I think we all get that you don’t want to have an abortion. No problem, DON’T F’ING HAVE ONE.

    See how easy that was not to enforce YOUR PERSONAL OPINION on other people?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  38. Neil Hudelson says:

    Boyd,

    And you are missing the point of almost all the commentors:

    At Planned Parenthood, YOU have to pay for the abortion. There is no fungibility about it. If you want an abortion, it comes out of pocket. If you find some sort of assistance from the state or from a nonprofit, great, but at no point is that money entering Planned Parenthood’s money stream pre-abortion.

    Fungibility is not an issue.

    It would be like claiming corn subsidies allows people to buy cigarettes, because both products are sold at grocery stores. No, the corn subsidies make corn products cheaper. The purchaser of the cigarettes uses his/her own money–subsidies have nothing to do with it.

    (And keep in mind this is just an example–I know you could extend the argument to say that cheaper corn prices means more money in the customer’s pocket. But then you are really losing sight of the original argument.)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  39. savannah says:

    As someone who has had an abortion I can tell you most definitely it is NOT free. I had to pay a nice amount. Don’t believe everything FOX news throws your way.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  40. Dr Rick says:

    “My problem with using my tax dollars for abortion is not that it’s for abortion, but it’s my tax dollars. I’m perfectly happy for people to donate their own money for social programs they support. That’s the way it’s supposed to be done, IMHO.”

    Well, my problem with using my tax dollars for bailing out banks or for invading faraway countries is that it’s for those things, and it’s my tax dollars.

    I’m perfectly happy for people to donate their own money for imperialism or welfare for Wall Street they support.

    If, as you claim, that’s the way it’s supposed to be done for social programs, then there’s no reason it’s not also the way it’s supposed to be done for imperialism and corporate welfare.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  41. Chad Daniel says:

    @Jay, Doug, and Boyd

    Its a wonder how little you research your topic before you form your opinion and let all the world know. 97% of Planned Parenthood is for OTHER SERVICES than abortion. You like women don’t you? Seeing as most of their services are directed toward women I suppose that might be a reason you know nothing about it.

    Making a fool out of yourself is enough punishment so I guess there’s no need to rub it in any further.

    Good day to you sir

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  42. Jim Bob says:

    While it is true that, when digging out of debt, no stone should be left unturned, I do think that we should start with the bigger stones before we turn over the smaller ones.

    What is it…$300 million to fund this organization that helps our most impoverished, desperate people? Is that a little over a dollar per person in America to do this? I’m not greedy enough to keep my $1.50 away from this. I don’t know how effective they are, but I’d rather they exist and help people out than lose them and gain back my $1.50.

    Here is a larger stone that could be turned over, were it not for the right: the income tax bracket.

    I don’t know why the tax bracket has to stop at $350K (or thereabouts). It seems like a graduated tax rate makes sense all the way up to the billions of dollar earners, especially since they seem to continue to increase their income, while many Americans’ incomes are relatively stagnant.

    It boggles my mind when I think of all the “average” americans out there who are fighting a war for the rich for no apparent reason other than ignorance, selfishness, or malice towards others (impoverished people, minorities, etc.).

    I am a Christian, and if any of the “Christians” on the right actually believe in helping others, they wouldn’t cut programs like this. I’m not going out on a limb when I say that Jesus would not cut this program, or other social programs that help the poor.

    There are too many reasons that are obvious (for anyone with a grasp on logic) why the tea-party repubs in office are basically evli, or incorrect / misguided for me to list all of them. It is frustrating to see people actually vote for these guys. I mean they are pro-gun, anti-poor, anti-middle class, anti-environment (pro-pollution), anti-freedom of religion, pro-war. How do you even consider destroying the environment?

    Here is what I would say to any right wing person in Pennsylvania:

    We live here in America, and you’re going to REDUCE the regulations (or the regulating capability of the oversight by de-funding things like the EPA) on fracking for natural gas? Presumably you use the same water I do, why would you want to add chemicals and radioactive material to that water? Are you an idiot? Increasing jobs and profits in the short run is not more important than BEING ABLE TO DRINK OR USE WATER in the long run.

    I apologize for being all over the place, but when people on the right these days are as wrong or evil as they are, it is difficult to find where to begin or what to say. Their ignorance / malice boggles the mind.

    Sincerely,

    Pseudonym Jones

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  43. pope tral says:

    we are the government. its not your money its the feds. not all citizens feel the same as you. and its no ones business to force morality on anyone.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  44. Tlaloc says:

    I’m perfectly happy for people to donate their own money for social programs they support. That’s the way it’s supposed to be done, IMHO.

    That’s the way to do it, assuming you don;t give a damn about the social issue in question. Look social charity is all nice and great to stoke the egos of the givers but it doesn;t do anything to solve real problems. Why? Because real persistent problems get to be real and persistent by not evaporation due to an ad hoc chaotic and unstructured attempt to throw money at them. They require intelligent solutions, which means somebody has to think about them and decide where resources are best used. A million people individually donating socks to Japan does them no good if what they really need is food.

    Social problems are just that- social. They need more than individual solutions.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  45. Mia says:

    @ Boyd

    What you seem to dismiss is that Planned Parenthood stands for women’s rights. The right to be able to get a pap smear even if you can’t afford it. The right to be able to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and cancers that attack the female genitalia. The right to get care pregnant women and for women who want to prevent pregnancy by means of birth control.

    While I do understand that you are concerned with where your tax dollars go. Also keep in mind that there is alot of items in the social structure that are funded by your tax dollars that aren’t as important as a woman’s health. I know it must be hard for a republican man such as yourself to think of anyone but yourself, but please think of the women.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  46. Jay Tea says:

    Planned Parenthood’s critics have challenged the methodology behind the “3%” number, saying that PP bundles all abortion-related services into a single count, while unbundling all other services to skew the numbers. I don’t know if that’s true, but we do have a single hard number that will allow us to apply a reality check to the number.

    Last year, Planned Parenthood performed over 324,000 abortions. Since Planned Parenthood says that abortion only constituted 3% of the services they provided, that would mean that they provided 10,800,000 medical services in the last year.

    Let’s take a look at those 10.8 million services. 2.263,776 were “reversible contraception clients, women” — which the footnote says are 17.3% are “non-prescription Barrier” and 10% are “No Method.” So, over a quarter of those “services” were “nothing” or “here, have some condoms.” Or, more likely, “have a condom, then come back and have another so we can count that one, too.”

    But I’ll let that slide. Let’s pare off 27.3% from that 2.263,776 million and knock it down to about 1.65 million services.

    Next up, STI/STD Testing And Treatment. They list “STI Procedures” apart form “HIV Testing Procedures.” I’d wager that those are done at the same time, for the sake of convenience, and that pads another 450K on to the total.

    Hey, look at that! Without even trying hard, I just challenged almost 10% of the “Total Services” listed, And that boosts the abortion count to 3.27%.

    And that’s just in five minutes, using the numbers and facts on their own fact sheet. Imagine if someone who actually knew what they were doing were to look at those numbers — and the underlying assumptions and fine print involved.

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  47. matt says:

    Jim Bob : My fiancee and I have both been to our local planned parenthood for various reasons none of which include an abortion although some of their services we use ensure we won’t have to make that decision..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  48. FightingLight says:

    All of this talk about parenthood makes me want to abort some zygotes.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  49. psyprofMG says:

    It looks like non of you lovelies have ever been preggers…intentional or otherwise. There are plenty of programs I don’t like my tax dollars to support. Starting with tax free religions and corporations. I have no problem with spending my tax dollars on abortions for any reason or no reason. Keep your hairy paws and righteous laws off my uterus. TYBYE

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  50. [...] The Result of the Conservative War Against Planned Parenthood Posted by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief in At TMV.Apr 13th, 2011 The result of the conservative war against Planned Parenthood: it seems to have backfired. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  51. Jay Tea says:

    PsyProfMG, so you’re saying I should just STFU while you stuff my dollars up your uterus?

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  52. matt says:

    Jay Tea : what part of the Hyde amendment do you not understand? Is the English too hard?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  53. matt says:

    Or are you just against helping poor people have access to pap smears cancer screening STD testing and such?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  54. Jay Tea says:

    matt, look up “fungible.” Let’s plug in some totally absurd and made-up numbers to make my point.

    A clinic costs $100 to operate for a month. Of that, $10 is for abortions.

    The government says “here, have $20 a month, but don’t use it for abortions!”

    PP says, “thanks, Uncle Sam!” and puts that in a special account that they use for their electricity and internet bill — which works out to $20/month.

    Then they take the $20 they had set aside from their other incomes for electricity and internet, and put it towards abortions.

    Planned Parenthood’s monthly budget has just gone from $100/month to $120/month, with the extra $20 from the federal government. And their abortion budget has gone from $10/month to $30/month — but no federal money is paying for those abortions, because that would be illegal.

    Got it, or do I need to dumb it down even more for you?

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  55. JMocha says:

    Until every single category of government spending is funded voluntarily by individual taxpayer choices (not my original idea; came from a story in a science fiction anthology titled _There Won’t Be War_), *everyone’s* tax dollars are going to fund *something* they find objectionable.

    For example, Liberty University has many students who receive federal financial aid (2009-2010 total abt $445 million in federal financial aid). My tax $$ are subsidizing institution that prides itself on training “Champions for Christ.” I find that objectionable… but clearly Boyd’s and Jay Tea’s objections are more equal than mine.

    JM

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  56. Jay Tea says:

    JMocha, you have just as much right to object to specific government spending as we do.

    It’s not my fault that I can articulate my objections more clearly than you, and I can find more people to agree with me than you, and we can get more of our elected representatives to listen to our opinions…

    J.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  57. rad666 says:

    It;’s really too bad if these right wing nutjobs don’t want their tax dollars to pay for abortions. I don’t want my tax dollars funding free healthcare for free loaders, or free health care for illegals. or as my state wants free english classes for immigrants. I don’t seem to have a say so in this, then they shouldn’t have a say so in planned parenthood funding.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  58. mantis says:

    Jay Tea just pretends there wasn’t already a discussion of where the money comes from for abortions at PP. Typical.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  59. Gini says:

    For all the people claiming that federal funding of PP’s non-abortion services should be cut because it’s a way of saving money, you are being penny-wise and pound-foolish. Eliminate low-cost cancer screenings and low-cost STD treatment, and suddenly you have HIGH cost cancer treatment and STD treatment, the price of which will be passed on to you. Eliminate low-cost birth control and you will see an explosion in both abortions AND the taxpayer burden for Welfare, AFDC, and other safety net programs. Planned Parenthood is a bargain.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  60. [...] surveyed in a CNN poll opposed defunding by 65 percent to 34 percent. At Outside the Beltway, Doug Mataconis writes, "What this means, of course, is that after a decade or more in which it took a back [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  61. [...] For now, the right wing’s two enemies, Planned Parenthood and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, are safe and will retain their funding until legislation decides otherwise. With the possibility that Planned Parenthood might lose funding, donations to the non-profit organization have gone up 500 percent. [...]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  62. matt says:

    matt, look up “fungible.” Let’s plug in some totally absurd and made-up numbers to make my point.

    AkA you can come up with any sort of “facts” you feel like since in effect everything is fungible. For example if I was inclined to waste some of my time I could use your methods to produce “proof” that you support eating babies..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  63. RedDave says:

    I am against PP, because I personally believe they use tax dollars for abortion. Until they can show us their books and prove otherwise, my mind won’t change. You can quote the Hyde amendment all you want, but laws are always broken. Now, I’m not trying to step on anybody’s toes here – don’t want to piss anyone off, but that’s my view – right or wrong.

    People argue that PP stands for women’s rights & health, and in many cases they might, but it’s the crap like this that pisses me off:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/04/13/tapes-show-planned-parenthood-abortion-ctrs-hiding-statutory-rape/

    Go over to liveaction.org for more “sting” operations. I just don’t see how an organization that acts this way is really fighting for women’s health. This isn’t just one incident either.

    So, I say that receiving federal tax dollars is not a right, but a reward/gift/etc. Criminal acts like this should result (not only for PP, but any organization that receives tax dollars) in forfeiture of all funds.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  64. Soleoblues says:

    Reddave: their books are available to the public, as is any entitity that receives gov’t funds. I’m on my phone, otherwise I’d post a link for you.

    The Lila Rose “stings” have repeatedly been proven to be false. They’re the result of shady editing and manipulation. When the uncut, unedited “sting” videos were released, they _always_ showed a different picture. Yes. Always. She’s lied more than once.

    And as for the comments earlier about using donations to fund low-cost abortions: that’s not how it works. When a low-income woman asks PP for assistance, she’s put in contact with her regional Lilith Fund office. This organization is not a part of PP. They exist to help women pay for abortions.

    Just doing my part to clear up a couple inaccuracies. Y’all have a good night.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  65. aaaaa says:

    “It’s not a war against anybody, it’s a matter of not using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions. ”

    Gratz, you won that in the ’70s, now go home.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  66. D says:

    Dear Everyone,

    Use. Google.

    Tax dollars can’t be spent on abortions legally.
    By defunding Planned Parenthood, the only thing you do is help prevent woman from getting cheap, necessary, good care.

    I’m tired of ignorant idiots.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0