Is Funding for Family Planning Agencies Coming Back Under Obama?
Bill Clinton scrapped it immediately in 1993, then George W. Bush reversed course and brought it back in 2001 on Day 2 of his presidency. Now there's been speculation as to whether President-elect Barack Obama will immediately chuck the "global gag rule" that currently prohibits federal funds from going to international family planning agencies that promote or provide abortions.
One of the biggest congressional proponents of doing away with the ban isn't completely confident that it will get lifted on Day 1. "I believe, obviously, the first actions of President-elect Obama are focused on the economy, and I think rightfully so, but I know that he cares deeply about women's issues in fairness," New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney tells Whispers. She tells us she's hoping to give Obama a nudge by personally penning a letter to the president-elect to advocate, among other things, this move.
Maloney is more positive that the United Nations Population Fund, or UNFPA, an organization that had its funding frozen by the Bush administration in 2002 because it supported "coercive" abortion programs in China (an allegation that the UNFPA has denied), will again receive federal dollars with Obama in the White House. "The UNFPA will be funded," she says. "The president will have to do nothing; he'll just have to let the will of Congress go through." Throughout George W. Bush's two terms, Congress approved funding for the agency, and the president continually put his foot down and would not release the money.
—Nikki Schwab
Tags: Barack Obama | Carolyn Maloney | Obama administration
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (7) | Print
Reader Comments
Infanticide from YOUR paycheck
Why can't we just work this subject BACK to the basic element ?
Is that too much to ask ?
That basic element is:
What CONSTITUTIONAL arguement can RATIONALLY conclude that sending MY TAX DOLLARS ( ESPECIALLY in this economy ) to other countries so that those countries can kill unborn children as part of their BIRTH CONTROL programs, is JUSTIFIED ??
I won't receive DIRECTLY from the United States government ( MY GD money, by the way ) ONE RED CENT to provide for MY PERSONAL bailout, but SOMEBODY STILL THINKS HE/SHE/IT CAN JUSTIFY sending BILLIONS overseas to fund "family planning" programs which include INFANTICIDE....
Family Planning
RL, I agree completely with you about abortion, but effective birth control is the best way to stop abortions. Many American voters who cheerfully voted for Obama don't know, or even care that he supported legislation to allow partial-birth abortions, truely a barbaric form of murder. But we are stuck with the old British colonial saying of: "the White Man's Burden" re the Third World anyway. Helping other countries control their population IS compassionate, good common sense, and increasingly necessary on this crowded planet. That's why Mr. Gore should give back his award, he doesn't have a clue..
The World's Problems ARE Our Problem.
Anyone who understands global affairs knows that not helping those in other countries will eventually make it back to the states. We import a lot of products--it will be easy to transfer diseases by ship. Ships stop at various ports throughout the world. Also oceans can carry diseases as well. Those who believe that we are not affected because large bodies of waters separate is is sorely mistaken. Our financial market is crashing and it is affecting world markets. If a massive disease hits China it will hit the U.S in the pocketbook. Not to mention contracting any diseases that are shipped from this country. In a global market we can't afford to only limit our health concerns to ourselves. Withdrawal or abstinence from world affairs is not an effective form of reproductive health
advertisement
