Thursday was International Women’s Day. Back home in the United States, it was just another day in the Republican war on women's rights. On Thursday the news broke that Mr. Popular Vote Loser had placed control over distributing federal Title X money designated for family planning into the hands of one person. That person is Valerie Huber, who doesn’t exactly believe in family planning—at least not the kind that works.
This news followed the late February announcement that the Trump Administration had a new vision for the Title X program, one that moves away from the Obama Administration’s commitment to provide women who can’t otherwise afford them with the full array of contraceptive options approved by the FDA. For anyone who thinks that this “women’s” issue isn’t also an economic one, here’s what a recent University of Michigan study found: “younger access to the Pill conferred an 8-percent hourly wage premium by age fifty. Our estimates imply that the Pill can account for 10 percent of the convergence of the gender gap in the 1980s and 30 percent in the 1990s.”
Under Trump, the Title X program now strongly emphasizes “abstinence”—no doubt thanks to the influence of a man who just couldn’t abstain from violating women’s bodies and bragging about it—and “natural family planning.” The latter is also known as “fertility awareness methods” (FAM) and is basically a more sophisticated version of the old-fashioned “rhythm method.” One word that didn’t appear in the new Title X document: “contraception.”
Relying on something those of us in the real world like to call “data,” FAM doesn’t work all that well. According to Planned Parenthood, out of every 100 couples using FAM over the course of a year, anywhere from 12 to 24 will get pregnant. The birth control pill, when used properly, is 99 percent effective, although not everyone does use it properly. A birth control implant, which does not require the woman to do anything once it is implanted, is 99 percent effective, plain and simple. FAM requires a hell of a lot more work than nothing, or even than taking a pill once a day. Plus, for women who don’t have regular periods, FAM doesn’t help them very much.
Oh, and if you think Trump carefully considered the issues involved here with anywhere near that level of specificity, I’ve got some overpriced, mediocre steaks wrapped in Trump University diplomas to sell you.
The people who do understand the issues reacted harshly to the announced changes:
“The Trump-Pence administration is quietly taking aim at access to birth control under the nation’s program for affordable reproductive health care, which 4 million people rely on each year," said Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “This is a clear attempt to roll back access to the type of birth control that most women want to use. The last thing anyone wants is for Donald Trump or Mike Pence to weigh in on her sex life — but this announcement essentially invites them into the bedroom."
And:
"There are no references to contraception and no reference to nationally recognized clinical standards for the provision of high-quality family planning and sexual health care," said Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association.
Valerie Huber, unsurprisingly, really likes the modifications to the family planning program she authored, calling them “meaningful changes to extend the coverage of the program.” Bear in mind that this is someone who produced sex education curricula that stated that teenagers who engage in premarital sex need to be “prepared to die.” We all have to be prepared to die someday, but I’m pretty sure that’s not what she was talking about.
Huber has also slammed Planned Parenthood for “normalizing” teen sex, and in 2012 criticized a program that provided contraception to teenagers in a Los Angeles high school because, in her words, it “set[s] an expectation that teens are going to have sex.” Right. They weren’t going to have sex but decided to do so because there are condoms and pills in the nurse’s office.
Sherry Modrano, the head nurse at the school whose program Huber was attacking—a program that was initiated because the nurse wanted to do something about teen pregnancy rates that were already sky-high even without the “expectation” set by a contraception program—noted that she had always encouraged kids to avoid having sex. As she explained, there was one major obstacle: “I would say that 90 percent of the time, abstinence just isn't working for them. Abstinence doesn't happen, especially when they're in a relationship." Unlike Huber, Nurse Modrano lives in the real world. Unfortunately for American women and families, Huber, and not Modrano, is now in charge of distributing federal Title X family planning money.
Huber’s goal certainly appears to be to redistribute a portion of the money that goes to scientifically sound, effective family planning toward what amounts to “I hope I’m not ovulating today” and to “just say no.” Does she care that study after study shows that abstinence-only education doesn’t work? I’d have to just say no on that one.
It’s worth noting that House Republicans are, once again, trying to insert a number of measures that threaten women’s reproductive rights into the must-pass spending bill that will fund the government after March 23. These measures include preventing the federal government from reimbursing Planned Parenthood for medical care provided—and remember that federal money is already prevented by law from paying for abortions—along with axing all the federal money for Title X and for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (the Trump White House has already zeroed out funding for that one).
Outside the Trump Administration and Congress, right-wing activists and media types unloaded on Planned Parenthood for another reason this past week. The organization, you see, has the gall to spend money to support political candidates who agree with them. They announced that they’d be spending $20 million on this November’s midterm elections. Conservatives don’t like that, and framed their criticisms around one matter in particular.
This argument is false. On the one hand, Planned Parenthood gets reimbursed by the federal government for services it provides. You might say to yourself, “how is this different from any other health care provider, like a for-profit hospital, who gets reimbursed by Medicare or Medicaid?” You might also ask yourself, “And don’t those for-profit hospitals and the corporations that own them spend money lobbying and trying to elect politicians who will serve their interests?” Those questions, however, come from a place of fact, logic, and reason, and therefore don’t matter to those who want to see Planned Parenthood disappear.
The other vitally important thing to recognize is that, as Politifact made clear: “the operational, medical clinics of Planned Parenthood cannot spend money in politics -- separate entities that are affiliated with Planned Parenthood can.” In other words, government money going to reimburse Planned Parenthood for medical services does not get spent on political activities. Planned Parenthood must raise money specifically for those activities.
Irrespective of the facts, the organization’s opponents simply scream that Planned Parenthood “get[s] $500 million a year in government funding.” In the words of uber-fundamentalist anti-choicer Tony Perkins (he’s the guy who famously gave Trump a “mulligan” on violating the sanctity of his marriage when he committed adultery with Stormy Daniels), “Your Tax Money Makes Planned Parenthood a Political Kingmaker.” Talk about a statement designed to inflame. This week, Republican lawmakers also made similarly false or misleading statements about the money going to Planned Parenthood.
Furthermore, the hypocrisy of Republicans here is truly galling (side note: if one played a drinking game that revolved around doing a shot every time we saw GOP hypocrisy in action, one might not ever be able to safely get behind the wheel). If there’s a problem with an entity receiving government money and then spending money on political activity that, for the most part, targets one political party, why aren’t Republicans attacking, for example, the Koch brothers? Here's what their company gets from the government—and remember, these aren’t reimbursements for services that actual people receive, and which themselves cost money to deliver (as is the case with Planned Parenthood), this is a straight-up handout from taxpayers.
Oil and gas conglomerate Koch Industries and its subsidiaries have received at least $422,796,782 in local, state and federal subsidies beginning in 2007, according to research by the Checks and Balances Project using the subsidy tracker built by Good Jobs First. The actual figure is probably even higher: Of the 231 government subsidies to Koch companies Good Jobs First found after 2006, 49, or 20 percent, had an “undisclosed” dollar value.
As for Planned Parenthood and its $20 million midterm spending spree, well, the Koch brothers’ conservative political network has that beat by a factor of—wait for it—twenty. As in, 20 multiplied by $20 million equals $400 million for this year’s midterms. That’s after spending $250 million on the 2016 elections. The Koch brothers’ spending is just as partisan in nature as is Planned Parenthood’s. What’s different from Planned Parenthood, however, is that profits from the company that receives those government subsidies can flow directly back into the political arena, as donations made by the brothers who pocket them. And that’s just one company getting subsidies and using them to influence elections.
Trump once declared that he was “pro-choice in every respect” and even stated his opposition to banning third-trimester abortions. Now, as the leader of the right-wing conservative movement and head of the Republican Party, he has adopted all of its radically anti-choice positions and may end having the opportunity to decisively shift the Supreme Court by giving it a majority in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade.
Whether Trump holds those positions sincerely or merely out of political convenience is irrelevant. Either way, women’s reproductive rights face their gravest threat in five decades.
Ian Reifowitz is the author of Obama’s America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity (Potomac Books).
Below is video of me discussing the Planned Parenthood and Koch Brothers political activity on cable news this week.