Female Democrats in Senate Defend Planned Parenthood in Debate on Continuing Resolution

April 14, 2011 — Female Democratic senators on Wednesday said they will vote against a continuing budget resolution for fiscal year 2011 if it includes two GOP amendments -- one that eliminates funding for Planned Parenthood and another that defunds the federal health care reform law (PL 111-148), but they did not say they would vote against the bill based on the inclusion of a restriction that prohibits the District of Columbia from using its own funds to pay for abortion care, The Hill reports (Lillis, The Hill, 4/13).

After passing seven stopgap resolutions in an attempt to reconcile differences among House Republicans, Senate Democrats and the Obama administration, lawmakers late Friday night announced that they had reached a tentative agreement (HR 1473) to cut nearly $38 billion in spending for FY 2011, averting a shutdown of the federal government. Lawmakers agreed that the bill would not include the policy riders to defund Planned Parenthood and the federal health reform law and, instead, agreed to hold separate votes on each of those issues (Women's Health Policy Report, 4/11). As part of the agreement, the budget resolution includes a provision that prohibits the district from using local funds to pay for abortion services.

Passage of the amendments to defund Planned Parenthood (H Con Res 36) and to repeal the federal health reform law (H Con Res 35) in the House does not mean they would be attached to the FY 2011 spending bill, unless the Senate approves them as well, which is not expected to happen. The House and Senate are expected to vote on those measures Thursday.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), one of the Democratic female senators speaking out against the amendments on Wednesday, said, "These socially provocative riders literally wage war against woman," adding, "Now [House Republicans] want to beat [women] up on the Senate floor. Well, we are going to stand up and we are not going to tolerate women being pushed around and being targets of this war."

Mikulski continued, "Just because Republicans are still in the dark ages doesn't mean women want to go back to them, and that's why we the Democratic women will be voting against the riders."

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said, "We will be the last line of defense for women in America. We will be here [on the Senate floor Thursday] to fight this battle for women" (Ryan, "Floor Action Blog," The Hill, 4/13).

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) on Wednesday said that she plans to vote for the continuing resolution as long as the two amendments fail in the Senate. "Even though there are certainly things in there that I'm concerned about, I think it's very important to complete the budget for this year," she said. Stabenow also said the D.C. abortion rider included in the budget measure is only a "five-month policy and hopefully it will be revised."

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said that while Democrats "did lose some ground on a couple of areas," the negotiations fared well relative to the demands of House Republicans, who wanted more extreme policy riders. "Compared to what they were going to do -- to women, to children, to health research, to college students, to health care, to everything that I hold dear -- we beat them just pretty handily in most cases," she said. Like Stabenow, Boxer said she is "leaning in favor" of the continuing resolution if the two amendments fail. "We are determined to draw the line in the sand. There are moments when you must do that, and this is one of those moments," Boxer said.

House Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) urged President Obama not to use the district as a "bargaining chip" during the budget negotiations. She also said, "If any D.C. riders are included in the CR ... that acquiescence by Democrats will make it nearly impossible to argue that they should be kept out of the fiscal year 2012 and fiscal year 2013 spending bills" (The Hill, 4/13).

On Thursday at 12:30 p.m. ET, the Washington Post will host a live chat on federal funding for Planned Parenthood with Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.).

Opinion Pieces Examine Campaigns Against Planned Parenthood, Women's Health

~ Gail Collins, New York Times: "For eons now, people have been wondering why the two sides can't just join hands and agree to work together to reduce the number of abortions by expanding the availability of family-planning services and contraception," columnist Collins writes. "The answer is that a large part of the anti-abortion community is also anti-contraception," she says. According to Collins, "Many anti-abortion activists believe that human life and, therefore, pregnancy begin when the human egg is fertilized and that standard birth control pills cause abortions by keeping the fertilized egg from implanting in the women." However, "this isn't the general theory on either count," Collins writes. She continues, "Beyond the science, there's the fact that many social conservatives are simply opposed to giving women the ability to have sex without the possibility of procreation." Collins writes, "What we have here is a wide-ranging attack on women's right to control their reproductive lives that the women themselves would strongly object to if it was stated clearly. So the attempt to end federal financing for Planned Parenthood, which uses the money for contraceptive services but not abortion, is portrayed as an anti-abortion crusade," adding, "It makes sense, as long as you lay off the factual statements" (Collins, New York Times, 4/13).

~ Kimberly Greene, Louisville Courier-Journal: In response to House Republicans' "misguided proposal" to strip federal funds from Planned Parenthood, "women and men from every community have come forward in vast numbers to stand with Planned Parenthood -- and reasonable policy makers from both sides of the aisle have paid attention," Greene, a member of the board of Planned Parenthood of Kentucky, writes. "By continuing to pursue this senseless proposal, the House leadership is displaying not only moral bankruptcy but also political foolhardiness," she continues, adding, "Standing with Planned Parenthood is a matter of common sense" because "family planning saves taxpayers nearly $4 for every $1 invested." According to Greene, "Killing family planning would increase costs for the government -- and locking Planned Parenthood out of federal programs would make those programs less efficient. The care that Planned Parenthood provides through federal programs costs significantly less than what other providers charge" (Greene, Louisville Courier-Journal, 4/13).

~ Meghan Daum, Los Angeles Times: "Most studies show that a majority of Americans have a favorable view of Planned Parenthood and support federal funding for it. But the vehement, almost obsessive opposition of those who don't makes you wonder if there's something in play that goes deeper than even the abortion issue," columnist Daum writes. She continues, "When it comes to parenthood, the whole notion of planning can be so overwhelming that it feels better to leave it to fate," adding, "And I suspect that's why a lot of people, pro-life and pro-choice alike, like to think of parenthood as something that was foisted upon them rather than actively pursued." According to Daum, "To plan your parenthood implies heightened accountability. It means you've made a deliberate choice, that you're well-prepared, that you're absolutely, positively capable of doing an exemplary job" (Daum, Los Angeles Times, 4/14).