THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VOTED THURSDAY TO
RELEASE ALREADY APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR INTERNATIONAL
FAMILY PLANNING PROGRAMS. IN A LATER VOTE, THE
LAWMAKERS ALSO APPROVED A PROPOSAL BY REPUBLICAN
CONGRESSMAN CHRISTOPHER SMITH WHICH OPPONENTS SAY WOULD
FURTHER RESTRICT HOW U.S. AID FOR FAMILY PLANNING
SERVICES IS USED.
SINCE THE 1970S, TIGHT RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED ON
HOW U.S. FUNDS FOR INTERNATIONAL POPULATION PROGRAMS CAN
BE SPENT. DURING THE REAGAN AND BUSH ADMINISTRATIONS,
NO U.S. MONEY COULD GO TO FAMILY PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS
THAT ALSO PERFORMED OR SUBSIDIZED ABORTIONS. THE
CLINTON ADMINISTRATION REVERSED THAT POLICY.
CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS TRIED TO REIMPOSE THE LIMITS.
IN ORDER TO AVOID A SHOWDOWN BETWEEN CONGRESS AND THE
WHITE HOUSE, A COMPROMISE WAS REACHED LAST YEAR. IT
SUSPENDED FOR UP TO NINE MONTHS A LARGE PORTION OF THE
FUNDS APPROPRIATED IN 1996 FOR INTERNATIONAL FAMILY
PLANNING EFFORTS. BUT THE COMPROMISE LEGISLATION ALSO
INCLUDED A PROVISION THAT WOULD ALLOW THE FULL
ALLOCATION TO BE RELEASED INCREMENTALLY IF BY FEBRUARY
FIRST OF 1997 THE PRESIDENT FOUND THAT WITHHOLDING THE
FUNDS HAD ADVERSELY IMPACTED ON WORLDWIDE FAMILY
PLANNING SERVICES. THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION HAS FOUND
THAT TO CONTINUE TO WITHHOLD THE 215 MILLION DOLLARS
WOULD CAUSE SERIOUS, IRREVERSIBLE AND AVOIDABLE HARM TO
THOUSANDS OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN, AND TO AMERICA'S
CREDIBILITY AS A WORLD LEADER IN INTERNATIONAL FAMILY
PLANNING EFFORTS.
THE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL PUT FORWARD BY REPUBLICAN
CONGRESSMAN CHRISTOPHER SMITH, WOULD PROVIDE 385 MILLION
DOLLARS FOR FAMILY PLANNING. BUT THE MONEY COULD NOT GO
TO ANY ORGANIZATION THAT PROMOTES OR PERFORMS ABORTIONS
-- EVEN IF IT USES NO U.S. MONEY TO DO SO. THE PROPOSAL
WOULD EFFECTIVELY END FUNDING FOR THE WORLD'S LARGEST
FAMILY PLANNING ORGANIZATION, THE INTERNATIONAL PLANNED
PARENTHOOD FEDERATION. IN AN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE
HOUSE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE, SECRETARY OF
STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT ARGUED THAT FAMILY PLANNING IS
AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY. DURING
THE TESTIMONY, MRS. ALBRIGHT HAD THIS EXCHANGE WITH THE
SPONSOR OF THE ALTERNATIVE MEASURE, NEW JERSEY
CONGRESSMAN CHRISTOPHER SMITH.
(SMITH) "YOU ASKED FOR EARLY RELEASE OF THE POPULATION
CONTROL FUNDING. I, TOO, WILL PUSH FOR RELEASE OF EVEN
MORE FUNDING FOR POPULATION CONTROL, BUT WITH THE VERY
MODEST PRO-LIFE CONDITIONS THAT WERE IN EFFECT DURING
THE REAGAN-BUSH YEARS THAT SEPARATED ABORTION FROM
FAMILY PLANNING. I BELIEVE THE CONSENSUS IS TO PROVIDE
FAMILY PLANNING FUNDS BUT NOT HOWEVER UNWITTINGLY
EMPOWERING THE PRO-ABORTION MOVEMENT OVERSEAS TO BRING
DOWN THE RIGHT TO LIFE LAWS AS THEY EXIST IN
APPROXIMATELY 100 COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD."
(ALBRIGHT) "THE U.S. DOES NOT FUND THE PERFORMANCE OR
THE PROMOTION OF ABORTION ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD AND WHAT
WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT THE RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE
ENVISIONED IN YOUR LANGUAGE PRECLUDES USAID FROM WORKING
WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE EFFECTIVE VOLUNTARY
FAMILY PLANNING AND WOMEN'S HEALTH SERVICES IN COUNTRIES
WHERE ABORTION IS LEGAL. I THINK THE ISSUE HERE, SIR,
IS THAT WE DESPERATELY NEED THE MONEY IN ORDER TO TRY TO
GET WOMEN OUT OF THE TERRIBLE POVERTY THAT HAS EXISTED."
THE DEBATE COMES DOWN TO THOSE FOR ABORTION RIGHTS FOR
WOMEN AND THOSE AGAINST. HELEN ALVARE IS THE
SPOKESWOMAN FOR THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC
BISHOPS. SHE EXPLAINS WHY HER ORGANIZATION SUPPORTS THE
SMITH ALTERNATIVE.
"WE SUPPORT PUTTING A BAN ON GIVING MONEY TO GROUPS THAT
USE EVEN THEIR OWN MONEY TO PERFORM OR PROMOTE ABORTION
FOR THIS REASON -- IT'S WELL KNOWN (AND IT WAS ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT LED CONGRESS NOT TO GIVE MONEY TO THESE
GROUPS BEGINNING IN 1970 ON A DOMESTIC BASIS) THAT WHEN
YOU GIVE MONEY TO GROUPS THAT NOT ONLY PROMOTE
CONTRACEPTION BUT ALSO PROMOTE ABORTION IN AN INTEGRATED
WAY YOU ACTUALLY DRIVE ABORTION RATES UP, NOT DOWN. THE
MAJOR ARGUMENT OUR OPPONENTS MAKE IS: 'WE WANT THIS
MONEY RELEASED TO US IN ORDER TO MAKE ABORTION RARE.' IN
FACT IF YOU GIVE MONEY TO GROUPS THAT ALSO PROVIDE
ABORTIONS THE ONE THING YOU'RE GOING TO BE SURE OF IS
THAT YOU MAKE ABORTIONS NOT RARE BUT MORE FREQUENT."
PROPONENTS OF FULL FUNDING FOR CONTRACEPTIVE SERVICES TO
THE WORLD'S POOR PEOPLE DISAGREE. THEY SAY NOT TO DO SO
WOULD INDEED INCREASE THE NEED FOR ABORTIONS. GLORIA
FELDT, PRESIDENT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF AMERICA,
POINTS TO RUSSIA AS AN EXAMPLE.
"WHEN YOU LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, AT FAMILY PLANNING
SERVICES THAT ARE BEING PROVIDED NOW WITH SOME OF THESE
FUNDS IN RUSSIA WHERE ABORTION HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS
THE PRIMARY MEANS OF BIRTH CONTROL AND THE NUMBER OF
ABORTIONS IN RUSSIA IN THE LAST SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS
SINCE THE FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED
HAVE DECLINED FROM 4.4 MILLION TO 2.7 MILLION AND THEY
ARE CONTINUING TO DECLINE. AND ONE PROGRAM THAT WAS NOT
FUNDED BY THESE FUNDS BUT WAS PRIVATELY FUNDED, THE
NUMBERS OF ABORTIONS PER BIRTH WHEN WE STARTED IN 1992
WAS 2.2 ABORTIONS PER EVERY SINGLE BIRTH. IN JUST 3
YEARS THAT DECLINED TO .6 ABORTIONS PER BIRTH."
GLORIA FELDT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF AMERICA. BOTH
MEASURES MUST NOW GO BEFORE THE SENATE. A VOTE ON THE
PRESIDENT'S REQUEST TO BEGIN RELEASING THE FAMILY
PLANNING FUNDS WILL TAKE PLACE ON FEBRUARY 25TH. IF THE
SMITH ALTERNATIVE LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PREVENT U.S.
FUNDS FROM GOING TO ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ALSO PERFORM OR
PROMOTE ABORTIONS, PASSES THE SENATE, IT WILL LIKELY BE
VETOED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON.
14-Feb-97
Source: Voice of America