Ron Paul would veto spending for Planned Parenthood, ‘family planning schemes’
Thursday, June 23, 2011 at 2:53 pm
- 10 Comments
GOP presidential contender Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has taken a further step proving his anti-abortion-rights commitment since signing the Susan B. Anthony List’s “2012 Pro-Life Presidential Leadership Pledge,” a pledge also signed by Minnesota’s Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty.
This week Paul issued a statement of his budget priorities were he to be put in the White House.
His second point of action — after “vetoing any spending bills that contribute to an unbalanced budget,” would be to “veto any spending bill that contains funding for Planned Parenthood, facilities that perform abortion and all government family planning schemes.”
“Like millions of Americans, I believe that innocent life deserves protection and I am deeply offended by abortion,” Paul said in the statement, without explaining what he means by “government family planning schemes.”
“As a Congressman, I’ve never voted for any budget that includes funding for Planned Parenthood. Instead, I’ve introduced the Taxpayers’ Freedom of Conscience Act to cut off all taxpayer funding of abortions, so-called ‘family planning’ services and international abortionists.”
Paul’s other economic plans include ending “ObamaCare” and repealing “unconstitutional and burdensome” regulations on businesses.
As the Iowa Independent recently reported, Paul is among five GOP presidential hopefuls that signed the SBA pledge, essentially making four promises:
“To nominate to the U.S. federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
To select only pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health & Human Services;
To advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;
To advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”
Since Paul’s post-pledge pledge, SBA List has dubbed him a “Libertarian for Life.”
Presidential contenders Mitt Romney, Gary Johnson and Herman Cain have not signed the pledge, despite pressure within the Republican Party.
10 Comments
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 3:06 pm
Well, the President doesn’t have a line-item veto. All that the President can do is sign or veto the budget bill as a whole. So does this mean he would veto a budget that he otherwise approved of due to this one issue?
Otherwise, how does this question even make sense?
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 3:43 pm
“Family planning schemes?”
I’m sure the world seems simple and morality easy for Dr. Paul but many of us have to contend with a more complicated decision set. Why don’t you leave the tough choices to the woman and her health care provider. Ultimately no law or fundamentalist defunding scheme will change that anyway.
Praise Jebus, God hates an independent woman, Amen.
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 3:50 pm
Relatively small potatoes in order to get the support of the GOP (think he would be nominated without it?). But really? Going after women? And women in poverty at that?
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 3:57 pm
You want an independent woman! So do I, but that means she should NOT be dependent on the taxpayers to pay for her baby killing abortions.
You want to leave the tough choices to the woman and her health care provider. Fine as long as she and her health care provider pay the bill.
Shouldn’t religion be between a person and their spiritual advisor? Then let’s let the taxpayer pay for that as well.
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 5:23 pm
@Kaphen,
Then you wouldn’t mind if the government ceased subsidizing religion through tax breaks?
Praise Jebus, God hates Caesar, Amen.
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 8:49 pm
Ron Paul has said many times in the past that abortion should be a state issue and not legislated by the federal government so this is a position change for him. The first three pledges are consistent with Ron Paul’s past statements considering that Ron Paul would likely eliminate the National Institute of Health and the Department of Health & Human Services and believes that things like “human services” should be managed and entirely funded by any state that wishes to have them.
I’m disappointed Ron Paul seems to be breaking a past promise to his donors (me) but I can’t say my conscience disagrees with Ron Paul’s new position on the abortion issue.
Ron Paul is still the number one most conservative candidate running for President in 2012. Go Ron!
Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 10:08 pm
Um Kaphen, you do realize how much government spending has helped and influenced your own medical care don’t you? With out government subsidization many medical procedures would not be available to you.
Ron Paul and any that believe the statements he made in this article are nothing more than ignorant morons. Planned Parenthood is a valuable asset to many who have no where else to turn. Making PP a scapegoat for the psycho right politicians to enthuse their potential voters is about as cowardly an act as I can think of.
Comment posted June 24, 2011 @ 7:34 am
Any male who speaks on the subject of women’s child bearing health should be required to show his uterus before crowing like a cock.
Women are the majority of the U.S. population. It is there position to determine this issue.
Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN
Comment posted June 24, 2011 @ 2:33 pm
I’m with you, Jeff.
We need to encourage some legislator to propose some over bearing law to slow down prescriptions for viagra just to show the stupidity of males regulating female reproductive control.
Comment posted June 24, 2011 @ 5:03 pm
Still an idiot. Defunding family planning clinics will only lead to more unwanted pregnancies and more abortions. Ban abortions as well and we will be go back in time to the abortion wards where doctors struggled to save the lives of women who, left with no other option, sought relief in unlicensed back alley “clinics” or tried a DIY solution. Making women pregnant does not make them have the baby.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
