Roundup: Special 2010 Budget Edition
May 8, 2009 - 9:25am (Print)
2010 Budget Slashes Funds for Ab-Only, Leaves Abortion Funding Restrictions in Place
All eyes were on President Obama's newly-released 2010 budget yesterday. RH Reality Check offers two pieces analyzing the budget, the first explaining the reproductive health and family planning provisions and the second taking an in-depth look on the move to fund "teen pregnancy prevention" programs over abstinence-only-until marriage programs.
The Wall Street Journal's Laura Meckler gives a terrific run-down on the funding structure supporting the new teen pregnancy reduction initiatives:
In total, the Obama budget proposes $164 million for teen-pregnancy prevention. Of that, about 25% would be open to abstinence-only programs, which would have to compete with other initiatives. The rest of the money is reserved for programs that have been proved "through rigorous evaluations" to be successful, the administration proposal says.
But Meckler also reminds us that "like other proposed cuts in the budget, it isn't clear whether Congress will go along. Liberals have derided abstinence-only education as ineffective and even misleading, but the Democratic-controlled Congress has continued to fund the programs."
And as for the future of abstinence-only funding itself:
Abstinence-only is funded through two pots of money, one that funds community-based programs directly and must go through the annual appropriations process ($95 million this year), and one that gives funding to states and is automatically funded each year ($50 million this year). The larger program was created amid complaints that states were skirting the intent of the program by focusing on mentoring and other activities. In recent years, in fact, nearly half the states have declined to accept this funding, which required state matching funds, partly because they didn't like the restrictions.
Mr. Obama is asking Congress to kill both of those programs. In their place, he is creating two new programs, both oriented toward the broader goal of reducing teenaged pregnancy.
The first program, which would be subject to annual appropriations, would cost $110 million, plus $4 million to evaluate funded programs. Much like the program it is replacing, community-based programs could apply directly to the federal government for funding. Seventy-five percent of the funds would be set aside for programs that have been proved, through "rigorous evaluation," to delay sexual activity, increase contraceptive use (without increasing sexual activity) or to reduce teen pregnancy. An administration official said that no abstinence-only programs have met those standards.
The rest of the money would be available to develop and test "innovative strategies" for preventing teen pregnancy. Officials said abstinence-only programs could qualify for these funds.
The second new program would be $50 million in automatic funding to the states. An administration official said it would be subject to the same 75%-25% split.
On Politico,
Ben Smith points out that cutting off abstinence-only funding "will cut
off streams of funding to religiously oriented groups allied with the
Bush White House."
Meanwhile, the Center for Reproductive Rights's Nancy Northup writes on Huffington Post that "I am deeply disappointed with President Obama's failure to strike government funding restrictions on abortion, particularly the Hyde Amendment, from his proposed budget for 2010." Northup explains, "The President's budget abandons the millions of women who rely on Medicaid and other federal programs for health services, including federal employees and their spouses and dependents, women served by Indian Health Service, women in the Peace Corps and in federal prisons."
And the Washington Times
picked up on the fact that Obama lifted a ban on using public funding
for abortion in the District of Columbia, despite leaving the Hyde
Amendment in place. "Under his proposal, the District for the first
time in more than a
decade would be allowed to pay for abortions with the money it raises
from its own taxpayers."
And for good measure...
Will Saletan looks at whether the abortion "compromise" strategy Steven Waldman is pushing
-- "safe, legal, and early" (wider access to medication abortion, and Medicaid funding for first-trimester abortion) -- is workable, politically and practically. Happy Friday, everyone!
Other News to Note
May 7: CNN: Testosterone gel effects in children spur FDA warning
May 7: YPulse: It Takes Two To Prevent Teen Pregnancy: How To Reach The Guys
May 7: Wonkette: Meghan McCain Reveals Nothing In New Column About Nothing
May 7: LifeNews: Arkansas Man Faces July Trial for Nearly Hitting Pro-Life Advocates With Car
May 7: One News Now: Local police shut down Slovak pro-life demonstration
May 7: Catholic News Agency: Texas bill proposes to punish infanticide with mere two-year maximum in jail
May 7: HuffPost:Tom Ridge On GOP: "We're Too Doggone Shrill" (VIDEO)
May 7: Feministing: Local St. Louis Company Bans Pro-Choice People
May 7: NARAL: Supreme Court Vacancy and YOU - Share Your Ideas
May 7: St. Louis Dispatch: Minors should need parental consent for contraception
May 7: Feministing: What Your Doctor Might Not Know About Birth Control--And Why It Matters
May 7: Live Science: How Safe Is the Pill?
May 7: AP: Kan. Senate roll call on anti-abortion bill
May 7: LifeNews: Intl Planned Parenthood UN Petition For Making Sex Rights Equal Abortion Lagging
May 7: CBS News: Abortion, The Morning After Pill, And Teens--Where To Draw The Line?
May 7: Talking Points Memo: Feminists: We Have Work To Do
