Pending Legislation

 

Pregnancy Prevention Bill  or Planned Parenthood Economic Stimulus Package?

 

Two abortion rights Catholic politicians introduce deceptive pregnancy prevention bill

Bishops pro-life office slams so-called pregnancy prevention bill

 

In a deceptive effort to show "common ground" two Catholic politicians, Reps. Tim Ryan (D-OH) and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), both known for supporting abortion policy, introduced a bill titled the "Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion and Supporting Parents Act." Sounds good so far, but anytime you have a bill being pushed by abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL it deserves closer scrutiny.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro is one of the most pro-abortion members of Congress. She voted against pro-life legislation eighty-five times, even against policy meant to protect minor teen girls and she has accepted over $230,000 from abortion lobby groups. Her co-sponsor, Rep. Ryan, was recently kicked out of Democrats for Life due to too many anti-life votes. He apparently was the "most pro-life" co-sponsor she could find.

While the bill does include an adoption tax credit and funding for adoption awareness, its main objective is to fund comprehensive sex education and contraceptives. It's request for an increase in Title X Family Planning funding would designate additional funds to groups like Planned Parenthood.

If President Obama and his pro-choice friends in Congress were really committed to abortion reduction they would direct funds to pro-life Crisis Pregnancy Help Centers - however in a campaign survey from an abortion group Obama responded that he did not support governmental funds going to these pro-life centers.

Rather, pro-choice members of congress offer us a bill that again wants to educate our youth in comprehensive sex education and shower them with contraceptives despite studies that show this approach is unsuccessful. Our young people deserve better.

Susan Wills, Assistant Director for Education and Outreach in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities called the bill a "Planned Parenthood Economic Stimulus Package."

She writes the following on these failed policies:

Some people might find this approach sensible. But they ignore at least two things. First, since at least 1980, taxpayers have been funding “family planning services” to the tune of over $1 billion per year. In 2006 such public expenditures totaled $1.85 billion. So today, virtually all teenagers who are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant are already using contraception. Only 7% are not using it, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Wills asks that we oppose the Ryan/DeLauro bill and support an authentic pregnancy help bill, the Pregnant Women Support Act (S. 1032, H.R. 2035).

 

Below is the entire statement from the USCCB pro-life office:

Bishops Pro-life office slams so-called pregnancy prevention bill introduced by Catholic pro-choice lawmakers

Let the Taxpayers Beware!

By Susan E. Wills

It should be called the Planned Parenthood Economic Stimulus Package of 2009.

Instead, co-sponsors Tim Ryan (D-OH) and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) have given their “new” (though largely recycled) bill the promising title “Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion and Supporting Parents Act.” Sponsors describe the bill as a “common ground” approach to reducing unintended pregnancies and abortions, one that should appeal to opposing sides in the abortion debate.

Sure, the bill is dressed up with some funding for after-school programs, and some (very poorly crafted) efforts to provide support for pregnant students. But make no mistake. The bill is “about access to birth control,” according to Congressman Ryan (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” May 19, 2009). In the same interview, Ryan explained: “We have to have birth control and contraception offered to these poor women who don’t have access to contraception, period, dot. There’s no other way we’re going to be able to reduce [abortions].” About what you’d expect in a bill whose co-sponsors enjoy a 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL.

Accordingly, their bill calls for grants for comprehensive sexuality education (abstinence-only educators need not apply!). It substantially increases funding for the federal Title X Family Planning Program. It denies state choice, making family planning services a mandatory Medicaid entitlement in all states, and greatly expands family planning eligibility under Medicaid to all women who are eligible under state law for prenatal, labor, and delivery care.

Some people might find this approach sensible. But they ignore at least two things. First, since at least 1980, taxpayers have been funding “family planning services” to the tune of over $1 billion per year. In 2006 such public expenditures totaled $1.85 billion. So today, virtually all teenagers who are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant are already using contraception. Only 7% are not using it, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Second, contraceptives don’t work very well in real life. In the first 12 months of contraceptive use, 16.4% of teens (1 in 6) will become pregnant. Among low-income cohabiting teens, the failure (pregnancy) rate over 12 months is 48.4% for birth control pills and 71.7% for condoms.

Numerous studies in the United States and Europe have found that greater access to contraception fails to reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions. A recent $10 million intervention in England giving at-risk teens comprehensive sex education and contraception is a perfect example. Teens in the program had a pregnancy rate 2.5 times higher than a similar group of at-risk teens (16 vs. 6 percent).

Why does increased access to contraception fail at the population level? Thinking they are protected from pregnancy and disease, more young people become sexually active and have more partners, offsetting any reduction in pregnancy from individual contraceptive use. And the increased level of sexual activity causes STD rates to soar. In the U.S., 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one STD; many of these are incurable and some are fatal.

The sharpest decline in unintended pregnancies and abortions since 1990 has occurred among those under 18, due not to comprehensive sex ed or contraception, but chiefly to the growing number of young people choosing to remain abstinent. Visit the Secretariat’s website for contraception facts and citations at www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/contraception/index.shtml, and let your member of Congress know that the Ryan/DeLauro bill cannot fulfill the promises in its title. The real abortion-reduction bill in Congress now is the Pregnant Women Support Act (S.1032, H.R.2035), which needs our support.

Susan Wills is Assistant Director for Education and Outreach in the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. To learn more about the bishops’ pro-life activities, see www.usccb.org/prolife.