When it comes to the topic of planned parenthood funding, one controversial issue has been whether or not states should be allowed to restrict federal funding to planned parenthood clinics based on the procedures they perform. On one hand, individuals argue that states should be able to pass laws that restrict planned parenthood clinics from receiving little to no federal funds. On the other hand, individuals contend that states should not be able to withhold federal money from planned parenthood clinics as long as they agree to stop providing abortions. I believe that states should not be able to pass laws that regulate federal funding based on the procedures that planned parenthood performs because they provide other forms of health care for women through federal funding.

Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit organization that provides and gives advice regarding family planning, reproductive problems, and contraceptives. Recently, Planned Parenthood has been in the spotlight in regards to the abortion services they provide. However, as Gayle King reports in “And the New York Times Reports the White House Offered to Continue Federal Funding for Planned Parenthood, If the Group Stops Providing Abortions,” both planned parenthoods president, Cecile Richards, and vice president, Dawn Laguens, contend that only 3% of planned parenthoods services include the abortion procedure (King). In addition to providing abortion services, Paige Cunningham contends that planned parenthood clinics supply multiple forms of contraceptives, sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment, pap smears, breast exams, pregnancy tests, prenatal care, research, and sexual education. These different forms of care help increase women’s overall health while decreasing the abortion rate. Approximately 34% of planned parenthoods services are simply providing contraceptives for women (Cunningham). While the facts show that most of Planned Parenthoods services are not abortions, states continue to argue that Community Health clinics, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 20 to 1, will be able to absorb and provide care for patients as Planned Parenthood clinics continue to shut down (Farmer). However, both Community Health clinics and Planned Parenthood clinics agree that community health centers will not be able to absorb the nearly 2.5 million patients Planned Parenthood sees yearly or provide as many forms of contraceptives for women (Shapiro). Planned Parenthood clinics play a much larger role by providing more services than Community Health clinics, or even a family doctor can for women in need. Planned Parenthood clinics allow women to have access to different types of contraceptives such as a pill or a shot, which I believe allows them to service a variety of women because not all women are the same and should not be grouped together.

The federal government provides funding for Planned Parenthood clinics via Medicaid reimbursements and Title X family planning dollars, which states can as of recently withhold from clinics that provide abortion services through TRAP laws. TRAP stands for “Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers,” which states such as Texas and Wisconsin are demonstrating (Morris). The state of Texas restricted Planned Parenthood clinics that provided abortions in four ways by requiring physicians to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of a clinic, banning abortions after 20 week, medicated abortions had to be administered according to the mifepristone label that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and facilities now had to meet the requirements of an ambulatory surgical center (Gerdts). Similarly, Wisconsin also limited Planned Parenthood clinics that provided abortion services by withholding Title X family planning dollars from the clinics unless the clinics agreed to stop providing abortions for women (Opoien). However, if the Federal Government who is providing the money to begin with does not add restrictions when it is given, why should individual states be allowed to add their own restrictions? In President Obamas last few months in office, he made an effort to protect Planned Parenthood clinics from losing funding by passing a law that did not allow states to withhold Title X family planning dollars (Cunningham). However, on March 30th, Vice President Mike Pence broke a tie that legally allowed states to withhold Title X family planning dollars from Planned Parenthood clinics (Cunningham). Conservatives that fought and voted for this law to pass argued that any abortion provider should not receive taxpayer funds even though the Hyde Amendment of 1976 prevents any individual from paying for an abortion via Medicaid and also inhibits Planned Parenthood clinics from using Federal funding for abortion services (Morris 58). This raises the question, why are conservatives trying to defund planned parenthood clinics if federal funding cannot be used for abortions to being with? As Vice President Mike Pence and his fellow conservatives contend, any taxpayer money that Planned Parenthood clinics receive are indirectly funding abortion services by allowing them to have more money from private donations for these procedures. This allows taxpayer funds to cover other forms of health care within the clinics. I oppose this view because even though Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider, the majority of the health care they provide does not include abortion services and absolutely no Federal funding is going towards the abortion procedures that they prove. 

In addition to blocking Title X family planning dollars and preventing individuals on Medicaid from purchasing a health plan that provides abortions, the newly activated American Health Care Act also blocks individuals from using tax credits to purchase health care plans that provide abortion services (Cunningham). I disagree with this because if an individual’s tax credits exceed the amount of Federal taxes owed, then that individual should be able to purchase the plan they desire without the government chiming in. I believe this because technically, it is now the individuals money if the federal government allowed them to keep the overages to begin with. Planned Parenthood is just like any health provider because they follow both governments/states rules while also providing the best care they can for patients with the money that is allocated to them. If Planned Parenthood clinics respect and follow the Hyde Amendment of 1976, then why are states not respecting and following the Roe vs. Wade ruling of 1973 that made abortion legal? Since 2010, over 300 abortion restrictions have been passed, which has caused over 70 Planned Parenthood clinics to close (Gerdts). Five states including Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming are all one of the few states that only have one abortion clinic left (Morris 58). Despite states efforts to withhold funding from Planned Parenthood clinics, as Gayle King states “the vast majority of citizens opposed to the defunding of Planned Parenthood.” While the vast majority of citizens oppose the defunding of Planned Parenthood, approximately 83% of Americans admit they do not know which laws pertaining to abortion are in place where they live (Morris 58). This allows for state governors to slyly pass laws that restrict abortion funding/services without the majority of people knowing what laws are actively being passed. The United States of America might be a Democracy, but state governors are clearly not listening to what the bulk of people want by passing unnecessary laws that restrict what a woman can and cannot do with her body. Furthermore, most of the laws set by each state that restrict abortions are passed by men. Men who do not have to worry about buying contraceptives, preventing pregnancies, or what to do after being pregnant. 

The restricting of planned parenthoods funds affects all women; however, it especially impacts low-income women who are on Medicaid. According to the Hyde amendment of 1976, federal funds are not allowed to be used for abortion procedures except in the case of rape, incest, or if the mother’s life is in danger (Morris 58). This creates a problem because low income women who are already receiving help from the government cannot afford to pay for their own abortions. In fact, 83% of women who receive abortions via planned parenthood clinics are below the poverty line (Morris 58). Due to states restricting Title X family planning dollars, which caused multiple Planned Parenthood clinics to close, women are forced to seek care elsewhere. On top of restricted funding, several governors have implemented their own laws. Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, now requires women seeking an abortion to attend counseling, have an ultrasound, and wait for a 24-hour period before having an abortion (Opoien). These laws cause women who are already struggling financially to have to take more time off of work, spend more money finding a facility that provides abortion services, paying for transportation to that facility, paying for the abortion itself, and finding childcare if she already has children all in order to appease state law. According to the case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, the courts ruled that states could legally restrict abortions as long as the limits did not create an “undue burden” on a women’s right to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability (Vaida). Although women can access abortions via clinics in other states, the money and time put into this creates an “undue burden” that is technically illegal according to the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey case. How does the government expect low-income women already in need of Medicaid to provide a proper lifestyle for a child? More importantly, how are low-income women supposed to avoid this issue of becoming pregnant and having to seek out an abortion clinic in the first place if they no longer have access to affordable contraceptives? If abortion is legal according to one law, but another law asserts that states can create their own laws regarding abortions, then there is no clear line between what states are and are not allowed to do. There is no clear validity in the law that women, or anyone else for that matter, can follow and trust in. This leads me to believe that the federal government also does not know where they stand in regards to abortions funding. Therefore, when an individual state make their own laws regarding abortion services, it is unfair to women all across America because some states may help Planned Parenthood clinics while others do not. 

Although states and the Federal Government may be conflicted on the subject of abortion funding, Planned Parenthood clinics across the United States are not. In the words of Planned Parenthoods president, Cecile Richards, “We won’t back down in the face of threats or intimidations” (King). I fully agree with Richards statement because this shows that Planned Parenthood is much more than an abortion clinic. This statement shows that Planned Parenthood clinics are committed to the care of their patients even if Federal funding is restricted/halted. As states continue to defund Planned Parenthood, not only women, but also men begin to fight back. Shortly after Donald Trump was elected president, who supports planned parenthood clinics but not the abortion service they provide, people retaliated with the pink hate revolution. The concept of this pink hat revolution was to be noticed not only on a local scale, but a national scale to show that women are united and are fighting for their rights. Not only did people rally against these new policies, people began raising money via bake sales, yard sales, and private donations in order to continue funding Planned Parenthood clinics. This shows, again, that the people are united and do not agree with the defunding of Planned Parenthood clinics. Women who are seeking contraceptives or an abortion will find a clinic that provides them no matter what the federal or state government says. The states cannot physically stop a woman from seeking the help she wants. This defunding act is simply acting as a barrier to cut down on yearly abortions, but if women do not have easy access to contraceptives or care, it will lead to more pregnancies, which in the end causes more abortions. Therefore, the states are indirectly increasing the rates of abortion by withholding Title X family planning dollars and other forms of funds from clinics. 

In conclusion, allowing states to restrict federal funding to Planned Parenthood clinics creates more problems than it does solutions. In order for women, especially low-income women, to help themselves and prevent harm, they need access to multiple forms of contraceptives. If the states were truly trying to prevent abortions, they would not restrict funding and would give women quick and affordable access to contraceptives instead of making the process harder. Overall, states are defunding Planned Parenthood clinics due to their personal beliefs about the mortality of the abortion procedure instead of removing their personal beliefs from the issue at hand.
