Abortionists don’t give up easily when it comes to getting taxpayer dollars, but they appear to have met their match in the New Hampshire Executive Council (NHEC), which last week rejected — for the third time in five months — $1 million in “family planning” contracts with health clinics that also perform abortions.
Under the proposal, three health providers would have received funding for “cancer screenings, testing for sexually transmitted diseases and other types of routine health care services,” reported Newsweek. Those providers are Planned Parenthood of Northern New England; Lovering Health Center of Greenland, N.H.; and Equality Health Center of Concord, N.H.
Planned Parenthood, of course, is the country’s largest abortion provider. It is also, reported LifeSiteNews, “the second-largest dispenser of hormones designed to interfere with the natural progression of puberty in healthy teenagers, which can have lifelong, detrimental impacts on their health.” Lovering Health Center and Equality Health Center likewise dispense prenatal death and adolescent mutilation.
The four Republicans on NHEC, which approves state contracts, voted against giving taxpayer dollars to these entities. The lone Democrat on the council voted in favor.
Republicans were under pressure from both the abortion lobby and Republican Governor Chris Sununu. Although Sununu, as a member of NHEC in 2015, had opposed funding Planned Parenthood because of its trafficking in tissue from aborted babies, he called NHEC’s initial rejection of the contracts in September “incredibly disappointing.”
Naturally, those hoping to receive the loot were also disappointed by the council’s third rejection. In a statement, Kayla Montgomery, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England’s vice president for public affairs, said, “This is yet another vote to dismantle the state family planning program and it is irresponsible and will cause irreparable harm to our network of care.”
However, in a press release following NHEC’s second vote against the contracts, New Hampshire Right to Life (NHRTL) pointed out that “Planned Parenthood of Northern New England doesn’t need [additional taxpayer] money. According to their 2019 financial statement (the most recent year available), of the $28.3m received as revenue that year, only $17.9m went to direct patient services, while $10 million went to profit, lobbying, fundraising, and administration.”
Moreover, noted LifeSiteNews, “while Planned Parenthood supporters will cite ‘cancer screenings’ and ‘women’s health services’ as reasons to send it money, analysis of its annual reports shows that abortion remains its primary focus.” Breast exams, pap tests, and prenatal services have all fallen off precipitously over the last decade, while abortions have increased.
Furthermore, there are dozens of clinics in New Hampshire that provide healthcare to low-income residents for free or at reduced cost. Losing services at a handful of clinics will hardly “dismantle” the entire system.
Besides, a 2021 state law prohibits the government from “subsidiz[ing] abortions, either directly or indirectly.” The law does allow an abortion provider to obtain state funding if an audit finds that the provider is not using the funds to perform abortions.
According to Newsweek:
At the time of the first vote in September, audits were incomplete.
Councilors received audit reports confirming that funds were not commingled by the time of the second vote, but one councilor said she was concerned clinics had not yet corrected problems unrelated to how money was spent.
State officials said Wednesday those problems have been fixed — but the vote was the same.
Councilor David Wheeler said the information provided was not enough to prove that state money wasn’t being used directly or indirectly to pay for abortion services. Neither he nor the other three Republicans on the council answered when Department of Health and Human Services Commissioner Lori Shibinette asked what information would satisfy them.
But how does one prove state funds aren’t being used for abortion? Every dollar a clinic gets for, say, cancer screenings frees up another dollar to be used for abortions. In addition, “tax dollars at abortion providers promote abortion by drawing people into the facilities where they push abortion,” observed NHRTL. It is impossible for the state to give money to a facility that performs abortions without “indirectly” funding abortions.
Then again, if states (and Washington) were to cease engaging in medical socialism, the problem of funding abortion under the guise of healthcare would solve itself.
