"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not
entitled to your own facts." This observation, attributed to Democratic
politician Daniel Patrick Moynihan, comes to mind as I see warring opinions
about the Trump administration's latest conflict with Planned Parenthood.
The administration has issued regulations to keep the federal
Title X family planning program from promoting abortion. Title X projects must
be financially and physically separate from abortion activity, and stop doing
referrals for abortion as a method of family planning.
Planned Parenthood and others, including many states, filed suit against
the regulations but have been rebuffed in federal court — and Planned
Parenthood is leaving the Title X program in protest, forgoing almost $60
million in federal funds.
One opinion is that the administration has shown its disdain for
women's health, depriving over a million low-income women of health services in
its zeal to defund Planned Parenthood. It has injected its ideology between
doctors and patients with its "gag rule" on abortion, aided by the
president's right-wing court appointments. Salon magazine even says the goal is
to end access to birth control because Republicans "hate the power it
gives women."
So now the facts. When Congress created Title X in 1970, it
included an amendment by Democratic (not Republican) congressman John Dingell:
"None of the funds appropriated under this title shall be used in programs
where abortion is a method of family planning."
Rep. Dingell said his intent was that "abortion is not to be
encouraged or promoted in any way through this legislation." Projects that
treat abortion as family planning would be ineligible for federal funds because
family planning programs should work to "reduce the incidence of
abortion."
And he cited "evidence that the prevalence of abortion as a
substitute or a backup for contraceptive methods can reduce the effectiveness
of family planning programs." In other words, when you offer both,
abortion tends to replace contraception. His amendment would keep this program
focused on its stated purpose and make family planning more effective.
In 1988, the Reagan administration issued regulations, similar to
the Trump regulations, to enforce this policy. In 1991, these rules were upheld
by the U.S. Supreme Court — including two justices, Kennedy and Souter, who
supported a constitutional "right" to abortion.
They said the court had long held that government may use its
funding power to encourage childbirth over abortion; the administration was
simply enforcing a policy enacted by Congress; and there was no intrusion into
the doctor/patient relationship, because abortion conversations could freely
continue outside this federal program. Judges are upholding the Trump
regulations because they must follow precedents set by the highest court in the
land.
The Trump regulations don't even "gag" counseling on
abortion as a pregnancy option. They only rescind a Clinton-era rule mandating
such counseling. Nor does the loss of $60 million "defund" Planned
Parenthood: It received $563.8 million in taxpayer funds last year, and states
with pro-abortion policies will try to replace what Planned Parenthood loses in
federal funds. The new regulations also insist that Title X clinics provide
timely referrals to primary health care providers, such as the nearly 10,000
federally funded community health centers serving low-income women.
A question remains. Why would Planned Parenthood leave Title X if
it really thinks this undermines women's health — when all it must do to stay
in the program is tell its Title X grantees not to do abortion referrals? The
answer seems to lie in a fierce ideological commitment on abortion, compared to
which women's health is unimportant. But that ideology is not that of the
administration.
Doerflinger worked for 36 years in the Secretariat of
Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. He writes from
Washington state.