Paul Ryan: GOP will defund Planned Parenthood

[PokerGuy]

Assuming I could round up the votes would you be in favor letting me cut off government paid medical treatment for overweight and obese Americans?

Sure, if taxpayers are footing the bill they should have a say in how their money is spent. Again, as I said right from the get-go, I think this is dumb, it doesn't make sense to me from both a political and practical perspective to go after PP. I'd much rather everyone have access to cheap contraception and reproductive planning help than have to have society pick up the tab for unwanted or uncared for children. However, I don't see why taxpayers shouldn't have a say in what they are willing to pay for and what they aren't. Your right to make choices does not include a right to dictate to others that they have to pay for your choices.

 

[fskimospy]

Sure, if taxpayers are footing the bill they should have a say in how their money is spent. Again, as I said right from the get-go, I think this is dumb, it doesn't make sense to me from both a political and practical perspective to go after PP. I'd much rather everyone have access to cheap contraception and reproductive planning help than have to have society pick up the tab for unwanted or uncared for children. However, I don't see why taxpayers shouldn't have a say in what they are willing to pay for and what they aren't. Your right to make choices does not include a right to dictate to others that they have to pay for your choices.

I pretty much agree. Nobody has a right to the taxpayers paying for anything but this is simply a stupid move on the part of the Republicans for practical public health purposes. They're going to end up with more unwanted pregnancies, more abortions, and more kids growing up in shitty situations, all things they claim to hate.

This isn't a smart or rational move but they are playing to a base that isn't either of those things.

 

[dank69]

Its illegal for government to target one particular business so they will indeed be affecting all women's health providers.

When we start hearing about back alley abortions the GOP will own it including any deaths that may result from it. When teen pregnancy increases across the country, the GOP will own it. When snap or other welfare claims go up, the GOP will own it and when they cut that spending they'll also own the increase in crime that's likely to happen.

Its going to suck for a lot of people but hey we get the government we deserve.

I also can't wait to start hearing about all the dead babies found in dumpsters. It's going to be glorious.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't understand why the GOP would single out "Planned Parenthood" versus any other family planning services provider? In other words, why wouldn't they just eliminate Medicaid reimbursements for *any* service provider that also performs abortions, or just eliminate federal funding for ALL family planning services?

They will probably end up doing something like that as if they defunded Planned Parenthood specifically that's unconstitutional.

My guess is that Planned Parenthood itself may benefit from disentangling itself from federal/state bureaucracy and operating solely as a not-for-profit with private funding, but would probably have to scale down and rural areas will lose options. I don't really follow the abortion issue so not sure how ill-informed I am.

I think any upper or middle class woman under the age of 30 with any sense should probably just "vote with their feet" and just fucking leave the backward states that seek to block Medicaid exclude women's health providers from Medicaid or limit access in other ways. I guess most educated young people (male or female) are doing that already, flocking to coastal cities with better jobs and leaving middle America behind...no wonder Trump got elected!

Yes, if PP were to lose state and federal funding then their smaller clinics that exist to serve remote, underserved, or poor populations would probably have to go away.

 

[OrByte]

Sure, if taxpayers are footing the bill they should have a say in how their money is spent. Again, as I said right from the get-go, I think this is dumb, it doesn't make sense to me from both a political and practical perspective to go after PP. I'd much rather everyone have access to cheap contraception and reproductive planning help than have to have society pick up the tab for unwanted or uncared for children. However, I don't see why taxpayers shouldn't have a say in what they are willing to pay for and what they aren't. Your right to make choices does not include a right to dictate to others that they have to pay for your choices.

If we choose to have government funded (reimbursed) medical care to women then we should be careful about how those funds are spent. That said, the services provided by PP are overwhelmingly important in ways OTHER than abortion services. By taking away PP as a service provider to low/no income women you create a bigger problem.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... seems kinda of appropriate since we are talking babies here

 

[PokerGuy]

They will probably end up doing something like that as if they defunded Planned Parenthood specifically that's unconstitutional.

Why would defunding PP be unconstitutional? Congress can choose to allocate funds to a particular organization and it can simply choose to no longer allocate funding to that organization. To my knowledge there's no obligation that they continue to fund that (or any other) particular organization. Am I missing something?

 

[PokerGuy]

I pretty much agree. Nobody has a right to the taxpayers paying for anything but this is simply a stupid move on the part of the Republicans for practical public health purposes. They're going to end up with more unwanted pregnancies, more abortions, and more kids growing up in shitty situations, all things they claim to hate.

This isn't a smart or rational move but they are playing to a base that isn't either of those things.

I've always said that the right is to abortion as the left is to gun control. For those topics they become completely irrational and are willing to do stupid things to support ideology even if there is no logical support for it. I think going after PP is stupid even though it will play well with the hard core righty base. The general public won't like it, and from a practical perspective it doesn't make sense for the reasons you listed.

 

[fskimospy]

Why would defunding PP be unconstitutional? Congress can choose to allocate funds to a particular organization and it can simply choose to no longer allocate funding to that organization. To my knowledge there's no obligation that they continue to fund that (or any other) particular organization. Am I missing something?

There's a good argument that would be a bill of attainder, which is unconstitutional. Basically, you aren't allowed to pass laws that specifically target one group for punishment instead of making generally applicable laws. In this case they would be saying that no federal funds could go to one organization specifically and a prohibition of access to any federal funds is definitely going to be considered a punishment. It's basically there to keep the legislature from doing an end run on the courts. If it weren't for prohibitions on bills of attainder then if Congress really hated you for example they could pass the 'send Pokerguy to jail' bill even if you hadn't done anything wrong.

If they are smart and want to avoid a battle in the courts they will probably just pass a bill that prohibits Medicaid funding to any organization that performs abortions or something to that effect. It will accomplish the same thing but avoid any possible constitutional problems.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Why would defunding PP be unconstitutional? Congress can choose to allocate funds to a particular organization and it can simply choose to no longer allocate funding to that organization. To my knowledge there's no obligation that they continue to fund that (or any other) particular organization. Am I missing something?

Most Planned Parenthood funds come from medicaid, and it's technically considered a private organization/charity. Government can choose which services qualify for medicaid, and rule that any organization providing abortions does not qualify, but not which businesses specifically, afaik.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Why would it backfire? America wants this.

Because often enough people don't realize how much they need something until it's gone. I think this is going to be the case here.

 

[momeNt]

Because often enough people don't realize how much they need something until it's gone. I think this is going to be the case here.

Cool, we are no worse for the wear with prohibition. Just think big picture and the long game and it will all work out fine.

 

[Jhhnn]

If we choose to have government funded (reimbursed) medical care to women then we should be careful about how those funds are spent. That said, the services provided by PP are overwhelmingly important in ways OTHER than abortion services. By taking away PP as a service provider to low/no income women you create a bigger problem.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... seems kinda of appropriate since we are talking babies here

Rich Repubs don't care. Any problems will be among the lower classes & won't affect their lives in the slightest. Besides that, they've sworn to defund PP for ages & their rabid Fundie base will get all twisted if they don't now that they can. They're nailing down that vote for 2018 & beyond.

 

[zinfamous]

You want MORE abortions, republicans? eliminate Planned Parenthood.

what a bunch of geniuses.

 

[JEDI]

more at Rolling Stone


also washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...care-repeal-ryan-says/?utm_term=.bb7626464377

empty words.
sure Ryan and his House Repubs can do whatever they want since they have majority.

but just like gutting obamacare, I don't see this becoming law.
empty words my dear Repub leader

 

[Ns1]

I also can't wait to start hearing about all the dead babies found in dumpsters. It's going to be glorious.

thanks Obama.

 

[theeedude]

There is a solution:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ernment-performs-u-turn-on-total-abortion-ban

 

[Jhhnn]

You want MORE abortions, republicans? eliminate Planned Parenthood.

what a bunch of geniuses.

Their Fundie base is on a mission from God. Unintended consequences are immaterial.

 

[ivwshane]

Most Planned Parenthood funds come from medicaid, and it's technically considered a private organization/charity. Government can choose which services qualify for medicaid, and rule that any organization providing abortions does not qualify, but not which businesses specifically, afaik.

Since abortions aren't funded by federal dollars, that would be extremely close to breaking the law by having an arbitrary rule like that. It didn't work with the ACA and I doubt it would work in this case.

 

[Sonikku]

Pro-life crowd is also usually characterized as the racist crowd by many here. Why not just release the abortion demographics and make them extremely pleased?

edit: on another note. Planned parenthood serves poverty-stricken people. Defunding it is basically tripping over dollars for dimes if you consider the entitlements avoided by keeping the unborn... unborn.

I don't think they're looking that far ahead.

 

[Blackjack200]

Why would defunding PP be unconstitutional? Congress can choose to allocate funds to a particular organization and it can simply choose to no longer allocate funding to that organization. To my knowledge there's no obligation that they continue to fund that (or any other) particular organization. Am I missing something?

Do you think planned parenthood is like a line item in the federal budget or something? PP is just a healthcare provider like any other. In this country we have a program that pays the medical expenses for indigent people called Medicaid. So when poor people with Medicaid go to PP for cancer screening, prenatal care, or god forbid birth control, PP is reimbursed by the government. This is the "government funding" of Planned Parenthood. Because planned parenthood was conceived as a provider of healthcare services for poor women, Medicaid is a huge part of their business.

There's a good argument that would be a bill of attainder, which is unconstitutional. Basically, you aren't allowed to pass laws that specifically target one group for punishment instead of making generally applicable laws. In this case they would be saying that no federal funds could go to one organization specifically and a prohibition of access to any federal funds is definitely going to be considered a punishment. It's basically there to keep the legislature from doing an end run on the courts. If it weren't for prohibitions on bills of attainder then if Congress really hated you for example they could pass the 'send Pokerguy to jail' bill even if you hadn't done anything wrong.

If they are smart and want to avoid a battle in the courts they will probably just pass a bill that prohibits Medicaid funding to any organization that performs abortions or something to that effect. It will accomplish the same thing but avoid any possible constitutional problems.

That is definitely how they'll do it but it will not avoid a court battle. It will be an ipso facto bill of attainder, and any competent judge would throw it out. Speaking of which, how far along is the GOP in shredding the judiciary?

 

[Jhhnn]

Fuck the rural places. The large metropolitan areas would cover probably 75% of the people needing abortions anyways. It would become a lot more efficient that way. And if you looked at the election map, those places further away from metropolitan centers can deal with a little less abortion access.

Heh. In those places, the kids leave as soon as they grow up, anyway. The goal isn't efficiency, either, but rather health services to people who need them the most, often rural poor.

 

[Blackjack200]

Heh. In those places, the kids leave as soon as they grow up, anyway. The goal isn't efficiency, either, but rather health services to people who need them the most, often rural poor.

If I have one problem with the objections to defunding planned parenthood, it's that they don't emphasize enough that it's just as much an attack on the poor as it is an attack on women.

 

[Jhhnn]

If I have one problem with the objections to defunding planned parenthood, it's that they don't emphasize enough that it's just as much an attack on the poor as it is an attack on women.

Repubs don't care. Little bastids should have picked better parents. They'll make great fodder for the privatized prison industrial complex.

 

[theeedude]

So on top of sending health insurance markets into a death spiral by getting rid of individual mandate, bankrupting many hospitals with unreimbursed care, tossing millions off Medicaid coverage, Republicans are also going to block funding to one of the few places uninsured women (and men) can still get health care from? They really are working hard to be the most hated group in America.

 

[momeNt]

Heh. In those places, the kids leave as soon as they grow up, anyway. The goal isn't efficiency, either, but rather health services to people who need them the most, often rural poor.

And nothing I said to do would change that. If an abortion clinic can't operate in a rural areas without being able to provide health services, then fuck them. They weren't democratic constituents anyways. The end effect would be the same health services to everybody, and spun-off abortion services to the metropolitan areas that have enough population to support them.

Please don't boohoo for backwoods honey boo boo, really nobody cares about them, so don't pretend to.