opposing ALL taxpayer funding to agencies who provide abortions
There's been some buzz about recent votes on
1.) the "Mexico City Policy" and the Democrats' reinstatement of taxpayer funding to foreign agencies that perform abortions
2.) the "Pence Amendment" (HR3043) and the House's unwillingness to stop $50-60 million of taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood through Title X funding (done in the last budget cycle through HR3010)
The first is regrettable but not surprising. When the government takes money from you and me to give to a variety of interest groups, giving some of it to appalling causes is par for the course. In particular, when pro-choicers have a majority in the Congress, such things are likely to happen.
The second is quixotic as policy (little chance of passing) but smart politically (puts pro-choicers on the record). I appreciate Rep. Pence bringing it to the proverbial table, since it brings attention to an important issue.
But why did the amendment appear in 2007 rather than 1995 (when the GOP took control of the Congress in the "Republican Revolution")? Presumably, this policy has been offensive to pro-lifers since 1995, but was not dealt with politically out of ignorance (didn't know it was there) or worse.
Likewise, pro-life groups have rarely been helpful in raising the issue. In Indiana, IRTL endorsed the Republican who voted for taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood (instead of the one candidate who did not) and failed to include it on its candidate questionaire. The same group then expressed dismay at the Democrat's vote for the Mexico City policy.
-see: letter from Mike Fichter, Executive Director of Indiana Right to Life, ripping Baron Hill
-see: my reply to Fichter (also published in the Jeff/NA News-Tribune)
-see: related blog entries from Hoosiers: HoosierPundit, Conservatibbs (July 16), Veritas Rex, Josh in the Box