A few years ago, I learned from an article about conservative leader Grover Norquist that the Republican plan for revenues & government was to “starve the beast,” cut revenue so much that government would have to cut popular programs that benefit ordinary people, like Social Security & Medicaid & Medicare, or cut funding for Planned Parenthood which administered 800,000 breast cancer exams last year, giving poor women a chance to save their lives with early detection. Now, I see via the Chicago Sun-Times, the Republicans want to cut food aid to pregnant women.
Cut $747 million in food aid for poor pregnant women and women with children up to the age of 5.
Every child in America deserves enough to eat. Every pregnant mother in America deserves good nutrition so her baby can be as healthy as possible.
Is there no compassion in the Republican Party?
Again this is a party that time and time again has given only lip service to banning abortion while significantly undercutting the very social programs that would significantly reduce abortions, as much as 70-90% according to Democrats for Life and the proponents of the 95 in 10 intiative (without altering existing law btw). Mike Pence is a liar and a fraud, federal funding for family planning a)does not go to abortion-it cannot and b)is vital to reducing unplanned pregnancies-the root cause of abortion. Cutting even more social programs would only increase the abortion rate, and gutting abortion laws would only increase the number of unsafe back alley abortions like the butcher shop in Philadelphia. Democrats must relent and dispose of their extremist pro-choice allies and move to the middle on partial birth, late term, and increasing regulation. The country for far too long has faced a false choice between a policy of prohibition or libertarianism, a sensible middle way, born out of a compassionate progressive social policy, would allow for greater subsidization of motherhood and increased regulation on abortions (a new law in VA treating abortion clinics like hospitals should be universally applauded by women’s health advocates for improving safety).
<
p>As I see it, this is the only way to ensure President Clinton’s vision of a country where this controversial procedure remains safe, legal, but ultimately rare. The Democrats must become comfortable becoming the pro-family party since the GOP obviously is not. And by pro-family I mean that literally, lets increase assistance to families, lets be the pro-motherhood, pro-parenthood party, and lets argue for gay rights in pro-family terms as well. Only be reframing the issue can we take it from the GOP, a party at its nadir of support and focus amongst the family values crowd (CPAC and the Tea Party are radically libertarian, not a family value among them). Lets stop ceding ground and fight them where they are perceived to be strongest (but are obviously weakest)
Something like, “To the Republicans life begins at conception and ends at birth.”
He used to rif on that, and also add “…until you reach military age”
Sources: here, here, and here
It’s preventative health care for children that restricts purchases to food that is good for mothers and kids and continues from pregnancy until the child is in school – whole grain cereals, milk, eggs, vegetables – no meat or sugary products. It is product based – not cost based, e.g., you can buy one pound of cheese (not fake cheese, real cheese) with a WIC voucher. You don’t have to bargain hunt or cut back in quantity to fit price limit.
<
p>Excellent program that’s been going on since the mid-70s.
Maybe Charles Blow is a bmg reader, his column today makes many of the same points
Will Saletan has a great article over at Slate that is part of a series of articles that he has written after the Philadelphia butcher shop was exposed that has shown how Pennsylvania and a host of states have been prevented by radical pro-choice judges from enacting sensible regulations to improve abortion safety. These articles have exposed how abortion clinics operate as some of the worst examples of a free market run wild, little regulation, little to no safety standards, no equipment inspection, and how progressive and feminist groups have been used, sometimes willingly sometimes not, as partners in a broader lobbying effort to keep millionaire doctors from having to face the malpractice repercussions their peers in other medical fields have. Just because this is the only medical procedure protected by a landmark court decision, does not mean it is not subject to the same standards of safety as any other. If anything, the advocates of female safety and health, who were instrumental in the early pro-choice movement, would be appalled at how their movement has been co-opted by industry insiders, lackeys, and lobbyists. It exposes how pro-choice feminist lawmakers, expressing valid concerns about women’s safety, were attacked by their allies as not being sufficiently ‘pro choice’, when all they were proposing were tighter safety and inspection regimens.
<
p>Some of the unregulated clinics and offenders, including an abortionist that was twice convicted of sexual assault and lost his license to practice as an OB-GYN, right here in Massachusetts, who still managed to run three clinics that refused (illegally) to take Medicaid patients and bilked the ones he did have with drastic fee hikes. Regulating abortion clinics with the same standards as hospitals, as Virginia is doing, or making inspections standardized and annual, as an executive order in Pennsylvania is doing, are sensible regulations. I applaud Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania for cooperating with that states pro-life Governor to write tougher regulations that ensure these tragedies do not happen. As Governor Corbett said it succinctly, this is not a pro-life or pro-choice issue, but a pro-safety issue and a pro-woman issue. What we want ultimately is for these women to be safe, regardless of whether we agree with their choice or not.
in today’s New York Times by Charles Blow.