Dear Editor:
Monday’s article, “Fight for Social Programs Looms Anew in the House,” describes a bill that would eliminate federal grants for Planned Parenthood clinics. Proponents argue that this would save money, and that taxpayer dollars should not be used to perform abortions. In reality, government grants are not used for abortion procedures, since the Hyde Amendment demands federal funding not be allocated for this purpose. Furthermore, abortion comprises only three percent of services that the clinics provide. Ninety-seven percent is preventive care including breast exams, pap smears, health education, contraceptives, and STD testing. A decrease in this preventive care would likely mean an increase in expensive emergency care and treatments later, so it’s doubtful that the proposed cuts would actually save money overall. Instead of disinvesting in affordable, preventive care for low-income and uninsured patients, the government should financially support these programs.
Sincerely,
Alexis Captanian
Berkeley, CA
Alexis,
ReplyDeleteYour letter reminded me of a news story I heard on NPR a few weeks ago about devastating cuts made to Texas' family planning clinics. Again, state legislators incorrectly stated that they no longer wanted to fund abortions and that the money should be used to provide other services. Instead, the state is redirecting $8.4 million previously spent on providing women with access to contraceptives and pap smears to the state's crisis pregnancy centers, where women are encouraged to keep their baby and not to have an abortion. Such centers do not offer medical services or contraceptives. State officials predict that such a reduction in services will leave 300,000 women without access to health care and will result in an additional 20,000 unintended pregnancies every year. This from the state that already spends more on unplanned births than any other state in the nation.
-Kate Troja