Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

Campbell Brown Takes on Planned Parenthood

“We got more than what we thought we’d get” — Rep. Bart Stupak (via C-SPAN)

AND FOR GOOD REASONS. There’s a dust up over Campbell Brown’s op-ed in the New York Times on Sunday, people coming to Planned Parenthood’s aid because of a blast by Dan Senor’s wife. The Times was wrong not to affix this fact at the bottom of Brown’s piece, because Senor is working for Mr. Romney in a foreign policy position.

Here’a snippet of a piece from Kathleen Geier at Washington Monthly:

The rest of the op ed goes on in this vein. It paints a picture of Planned Parenthood that in no way resembles reality. This is not an organization “driven by blind partisanship, electing to burn bridges instead of building them” or one that “sees ideological purity as so paramount that it permeates every aspect of its strategic planning.” It is, rather, an organization that does vitally important work in serving women’s health needs, that is being smeared with vicious lies, that has been under brutal assault for years now, and that is fighting for its life. It makes total sense for them to not support Republicans, because to the extent that the Republican Party, particularly in its current lunatic incarnation, is empowered, Planned Parenthood’s existential survival is threatened.

Campbell Brown is being called a “concern troll” for taking on Planned Parenthood’s “strategy driven by blind partisanship,” which is exhibited by her progressive detractors taking on her argument against Sen. Susan Collins because of her vote for Justice Alito. Brown also trumpets Rep. Robert Dodd, which Geier of the WM points out was endorsed by Phyllis Schlafly of all people. Geier goes on to make the case that Dodd was also supported the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.

Regardless of these examples, it’s really hard to argue Planned Parenthood isn’t a partisan organization at its core.

Planned Parenthood isn’t in as bad a position as organized labor, but they’ve got the same problem. There really is no excuse for not being amenable to Republicans like Sen. Susan Collins, even given her vote on Alito, because Planned Parenthood is hardly clean on selling out.

Planned Parenthood chose not to blast Democrats and the White House on Obamacare when the Hyde Amendment was codified in that law. That act was made possible through none other than former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who elevated Stupak-Pitts in the House and boasted about doing it, which made Sen. Ben Nelson’s language possible in ACA, which Pres. Obama helped along through in a signing statement on Stupak-Pitts.

“I was part of recommending that [Stupak-Pitts Amendment] come to the floor. Both sides are whipping, the pro-choice side and others who want to support the amendment. But no, that was my recommendation to allow a vote on that amendment.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Below is what Cecile Richards should have sounded like, instead of what she did (see video below), if she was about protecting women, instead of Pres. Obama and Democrats. From RH Reality Check back in 2010:

Turns out, earlier this week, in this, the (equally hot, politically), but second trimester of the President’s Hyde-redux-and-more, Stupak-evil, though the President said otherwise, (keep reading) Executive Order, it became clear that the White House had instructed Kathleen Sibelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, to avoid any dustups about abortion in her regs’-writing for the healthcare reform bill, no matter the cost to America in the loss of American women’s lives.

Mr. President: A word to the wise: Better not further jeopardize your standing, when we’re not sure whether the BP cap won’t go bust. Mr. President: A word to the wise, even if it becomes clear you’ve gone back on your staff’s statements that your Stupak-evil Order doesn’t do anything more than “codify” existing law. Better to continue to say, albeit falsely, that the Stupak Amendment you once said you wouldn’t abide (either) wouldn’t be a part of anything you do. This abortion matter? Well, it’s just too touchy to do otherwise (even if “otherwise” is the right thing for half of all Americans).

In fact, and as we all know, the Executive Order was nothing but a most willingly made sop to Rep. Stupak. …

Sure, I’ll negotiate with you ad nauseum, instead of refusing to participate until my demand for equal treatment is met (Barbara Boxer in the Senate). Sure, I’ll send threatening letters with no force of law or policy (Diana DeGette in the House), in hopes that you’ll do the right thing. Sure, I’ll support you when you tell me it’s a good idea to (only) “codify” in an Executive Order something, (The Hyde Amendment), which, by any measure, has been horrible for women for over two generations (The Speaker and her pro-choice Member leaders). Sure, I’ll believe you when you say that this Executive Order won’t have any additional force of law in any upcoming circumstance that matters to women’s health (again, the Speaker and the women Members). Sure, I’ll believe you, Mr. President–when you sign Mr. Stupak’s evil Order–with no press present and surrounded by the architects of hateful acts against my sisters–when you tell me nothing is amiss.

Cecile Richards and Planned Parenthood did absolutely nothing to fight the codifying of Hyde in the Affordability Care Act. They sat on the sidelines due to the incoming directed at Pres. Obama and Democrats, because they didn’t want to rock their own benefactors’ boat.

Here’s Ezra Klein on what that meant:

Because of the limits placed on the exchanges, most of the participants will have some form of premium credit or affordable subsidy. That means most will be ineligible for abortion coverage. The idea that people are going to go out and purchase separate “abortion plans” is both cruel and laughable. If this amendment passes, it will mean that virtually all women with insurance through the exchange who find themselves in the unwanted and unexpected position of needing to terminate a pregnancy will not have coverage for the procedure. Abortion coverage will not be outlawed in this country. It will simply be tiered, reserved for those rich enough to afford insurance themselves or lucky enough to receive from their employers.

Workers and women need strong advocates, but the compromises these organizations make to keep their sugar daddies on board doesn’t benefit their constituents, which is why organizations like Planned Parenthood got sandbagged by Democrats. Cecile Richards was too besotted to realize conservatives against women’s freedoms come in all stripes, including Democratic.

It was Democrats who codified the Hyde Amendment into law through Sen. Ben Nelson’s language, with the help of Planned Parenthood’s silence, adopted from Stupak-Pitts, which hadn’t happened until the Obama administration and the first female Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi allowed it to.

You decide if that is equally heinous compared to Susan Collins voting for Samuel Alito.

There are a lot of abortion advocates on the Republican side, including Catholics, who support Planned Parenthood as well. Where are those allies represented in Congress and how does not encouraging abortion advocate Republicans, the most rare of political species, help women?

Oh, and if you’re wondering where the war on women began, it started when Democrats codified the Hyde Amendment in the Affordability Care Act, while Planned Parenthood stood by silently, because they couldn’t afford to buck their benefactors. Since Stupak-Pitts was elevated through a signing statement by Pres. Obama, which begat the Nelson language that codified the Hyde Amendment into Obamacare, there has been more anti-abortion legislation introduced around the United States than at any time in history.

You won’t hear Planned Parenthood make that case and we all know why.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to Campbell Brown Takes on Planned Parenthood

  1. secularhumanizinevoluter June 25, 2012 at 9:47 am #

    “Oh, and if you’re wondering where the war on women began, it started when Democrats codified the Hyde Amendment in the Affordability Care Act, while Planned Parenthood stood by silently, because they couldn’t afford to buck their benefactors. Since Stupak-Pitts was elevated through a signing statement by Pres. Obama, which begat the Nelson language that codified the Hyde Amendment into Obamacare, there has been more anti-abortion legislation introduced around the United States than at any time in history.”

    There can be no doubt that Stupak-Pitts was a terrible and needless cave to the anti womens reproductive rights mob.
    But do you seriously think the repugnantklan/teabagger mob in the house or the repug/bagger governors would have put forward one single less law/attempt to deny women their RIGHT to a safe, legal abortion should they so chose?

    • Taylor Marsh June 25, 2012 at 10:00 am #

      You’re ignoring the facts & history of what happened.

      I understand this, because the reality is painful for partisan Democrats.

      The truest answer I can give you is we’ll never know, even if we do know the right has always been against women’s freedoms.

      What we also know is the onslaught accelerated after a Democratic president & the first female speaker of the House emboldened DEMOCRATIC CONSERVATIVES, without Planned Parenthood saying much of anything.

      Oh, and let me add that Stupak-Pitts happened because “progressive Pro-Choice Caucus” in the House didn’t do squat.

      • casualobserver June 25, 2012 at 11:08 am #

        Well said on the political score. As everyone with a memory knows, the carveout language was added exclusively to capture votes of Democratic legislators. It did not change a single thing relative to Republican votes.

        With that said, now here is someone that I can respect on this matter. She walks the walk, not just types the talk………….

        Anne Nicol Gaylor has been the leader of the Freedom from Religion Foundation for decades, and is well known on that account. Less well known is the fact that she has written checks from her own account for nearly 19,000 abortions. She has no staff, no answering machine, no relief. She has answered every call herself and talked individually with each of these women — or, more properly, these women and girls, some as young as twelve — who could not afford to have an abortion.

      • secularhumanizinevoluter June 25, 2012 at 3:36 pm #

        “What we also know is the onslaught accelerated after a Democratic president & the first female speaker of the House emboldened DEMOCRATIC CONSERVATIVES, without Planned Parenthood saying much of anything.”

        How many anti-choice laws or regulations were proposed while Dems held the majority in the House and how many after the repug/baggers took over? And that says nothing about the attempts to deny women their rights at the state level whether by governor or state house actions?

  2. StrideHyde June 25, 2012 at 10:04 am #

    Funny, I thought the war started when NARAL-Pro Choice endorsed Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton. But what do I know? :roll:

  3. StrideHyde June 25, 2012 at 12:15 pm #

    Interesting, casual. Perhaps more people like her will emerge when participants on the exchanges find themselves without coverage. It bears pointing out that most Americans will still have employer coverage and thus will not be on the exchanges, although when small businesses are allowed to go to the exchanges that might change. It also bears pointing out that yes, Stupak was added to gain Democratic votes, no difference was made among Republicans because they were all lined up against it already.

  4. Cujo359 June 25, 2012 at 3:11 pm #

    There really is no excuse for not being amenable to Republicans like Sen. Susan Collins, even given her vote on Alito, because Planned Parenthood is hardly clean on selling out.

    I think that this is the way pressure groups ought to work, at least in the short term. Have minimum standards of support you expect in return for your support. Politicians who cross that line should know by example, which is the only practical way they can know in politics, what straying beyond those limits means.

    That’s not to say that there should be unforgivable sins in politics, but the path to redemption shouldn’t be easy, and it should involve actual actions, not promises.

    Campbell Brown’s charge that PP is entirely too interested in supporting Democrats may be a valid one, and if they are cutting Dems a break but not Republicans, then that’s another thing altogether. But on the basic question of whether PP, or any other political pressure group should act the way it did toward Sen. Collins in the short term, then the answer is yes, it should. I don’t give groups like them money so they can be best buds with the politicians. I give it to them so they’ll help the politicians who support that agenda, and kick the asses of the ones who don’t.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong