Why did the three month debate in Congress over cutting Planned Parenthood’s funding focus so much on 3% of the services?Illustration by Micco Caporale
Planned Parenthood survived the latest legislative threat on its services when the Senate voted April 14 against the House’s motion to block the organization’s government funding.
Now that the debate is over, what is there left to say about it?
Perhaps what we should really do is step back and consider just how much the classic red herring fallacy ruled the debate in congress and slanted the way the media covered it. Can’t anyone just talk about the actual issue anymore?
Here are the real issues: Could a growing lower class find funding for sexual health issues if the government blocked funding? When making cuts that involve Americans’ access to health care, are there other services that may be more expendable?
We spent two months discussing abortion services, three percent of Planned Parenthood’s total operations. We did not talk nearly as much about the 97 percent of its services that help more than 5,000,000 people worldwide every year.
Seems a little unbalanced. We did talk about how Planned Parenthood receives $330 million year, but we didn’t talk about the 81 percent increase the defense budget has gotten since 2004 — and that’s before adding in the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The $680 billion defense budget in 2010 wasn’t too strained to fund the development of an F-22 (which cost $350 million each) that we’re not even using. These seem like numbers worth considering.
Yet, on the abortion issue alone, we get all of the hottest clips from Congress, such as Senator Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) who received a lot of heat after he incorrectly cited Planned Parenthood’s abortion practice as 90 percent of their operations. On the other side of the aisle, in February, the media heavily replayed the clip of Representative Jackie Speir (D-California) giving an emotional account about her use of Planned Parenthood for their abortion services.
No wonder everyone thinks this is all Planned Parenthood does. But is it really responsible to focus all of our legislative powers on three percent? Is it responsible to mislead the American public? Should we shut down Kroger because three percent of what they sell is alcohol?
But three percent is still three percent right? Well, not exactly. This is the second major misconception. The way the numbers are thrown around, it would seem as if the government entirely funds Planned Parenthood operations, but the fact of the matter is government grants make up only 33 percent of its annual revenue. Planned Parenthood, like most nonprofits, relies heavily on private donors and in-house income to stay afloat every year.
The Title X grant supplemented by the U.S. government stipulates that none of this funding can be used to finance abortions, so why is it even part of the dialogue? Government funding goes to finance the organization’s primary functions: providing contraception, treatment of STI’s (sexually transmitted infections) and cancer screenings and prevention.
The rhetoric is a distraction. It’s a distraction on both sides of the table and whether it infuriates you or not, think about what you’re being distracted from.
People. When we make a debate over inflammatory sound bytes instead of the facts, the everyday people who use these services are the ones forgotten.
There is nothing scarier than not feeling like you have control over your own body. For 71 years, Planned Parenthood has provided health care on a rolling scale that will do its best to meet your financial situation.
Most of these services are far more basic than you’d think from the current talks. Women are advised to get a pap smear once a year. We’re told to get breast exams regularly. Men and women alike may want to get tested before becoming sexually active. We’re told how responsible adults act, but we’re not told what to do if finances conflict with responsibility.
For years in health class we are told to be proactive about our sexual health, but the reality is that with the economic assault on the middle class over the past five years, more and more people are not able to meet costs for the things they need, even for health care.
We owe it to the growing working class to continue to think about ways to bring autonomy back into their lives, into our lives, and not be sold by the rhetoric.