Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Trump Defund Planned Parenthood Through Executive Action?
Hotair ^ | 05/17/2018 | Ed Morrissey

Posted on 05/17/2018 6:38:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Despite continuous promises to the pro-life cause, Republican budgets still fund Planned Parenthood to the tune of over $500 million each year. Efforts to decertify the nation’s largest abortion-mill chain ran into stiff opposition during the ObamaCare repeal effort from Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, and Democrats torpedoed an attempt to include it in the budget agreement. The legislative path seems all but dead unless Republicans can win enough Senate seats to overcome a filibuster as well as hold onto the House in November — an outcome with odds on the order of having the Cleveland Browns win the next Super Bowl.

But does another path exist without congressional approval? The Hill says … maaaaybeeee. Donald Trump may take a page out of Ronald Reagan’s playbook:

Opponents of abortion have launched an all-out campaign urging the administration to bring back Reagan-era abortion restrictions on federal family planning dollars that would target Planned Parenthood.

The regulations would ban organizations that receive family planning dollars under the Title X Family Planning Program, which funds organizations providing services like birth control to low-income women and men, from promoting abortion or referring patients for abortions.

Former President Reagan first issued the regulations, which Democrats describe as a “domestic gag rule,” in 1988. They also require a physical and financial separation of Title X funding recipients from abortion providers.

The Supreme Court upheld Reagan’s action in Rust v Sullivan in 1991, but by that time it was moot. Reagan’s term had ended, and subsequent administrations have either not wanted to press the issue (the Bushes) or were openly hostile to the policy (Clinton and Obama). With legislative options exhausted — at least for now — pro-life activists are now pressing Trump to use his executive authority to shut down the funding stream to Planned Parenthood.

One argument in favor of this is sheer electoral politics:

Republicans see the action as a way to motivate the GOP base ahead of the midterm elections, where the party’s majorities in the House and Senate are in play.

“The life issue is a huge motivator for the right. Getting a win on the pro-life side, even if it’s regulatory rather than legislative, would be huge, and encourage people to come out and vote for the members who pushed for action on this,” said Kelly Marcum, a legislative assistant for the conservative Family Research Council, which has been pushing for the changes.

I’m in favor of the policy, but am skeptical of this argument for it. Using executive power to resolve this issue actually removes it from concern for at least the next couple of years. It might make for an effective strategy for 2020 — If you don’t vote for Trump, you’re voting to give Planned Parenthood $500 million a year! — but an EO or regulatory change puts this completely outside the context of legislative elections. It might work better as it is now to hammer Democrats for continuing to fund abortion mills with taxpayer dollars.

If Trump decides to go forward with this strategy, it’ll be a long time before the dollars get cut off. The Supreme Court may have finally blessed Reagan’s action in 1991, but that won’t keep Planned Parenthood and its defenders from filing lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions to force it back into the courts. It might be three or more years again before courts stop imposing temporary injunctions on the Trump administration to suspend any new “gag rule.”

That doesn’t mean it’s not a worthwhile choice, but it does demonstrate that it’s still best to work though the legislature where possible to enact changes in policy. Failing that, though, it may be the only option to deal with the issue. As Yuval Levin and Ben Domenech wrote three years ago, Planned Parenthood and its supporters engage in a bit of a bait-and-switch when it comes to that funding:

“The instinct to respond to the tapes by forcing a shutdown over the federal funds that Planned Parenthood clinics can get through Title X and Medicaid is understandable and appropriate. Title X is not supposed to make funds available to abortion providers, but Planned Parenthood gets around the legal prohibition by formally separating its abortion clinics and its other family planning services, even when those are located in the same facility and essentially funded jointly. When states have tried to limit Planned Parenthood’s access to Medicaid funds, meanwhile, the Obama administration has told them they can’t, even though federal law prohibits federal Medicaid dollars from funding abortion. In both cases, federal dollars are being spent in ways that contravene the intent and spirit of the legal prohibitions on federal funding of abortion provision, and the biggest beneficiary by far is Planned Parenthood (which has been for many years, for instance, the largest single recipient of Title X money).”

The point is that by drawing an artificial line between its abortion practices and its abortion promoting practices, Planned Parenthood has been circumventing the intent of the legal funding prohibitions for decades in order to access Title X funds. They have an arm funded by the taxpayers which is in the business of promoting abortion, and then another arm that profits from those abortions (in ways, we are finding, that are much more macabre than we assumed). But the Supreme Court has already vindicated Ronald Reagan’s rule on the matter, meaning that the next president could lawfully adopt the same approach to determining how these funds are distributed and in one act dramatically undercut Planned Parenthood.

In other words, it might be worth trying just for all the clarity such an action would provide.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; defunding; defundpp; federalspending; plannedparenthood; trumpeo

1 posted on 05/17/2018 6:38:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hey, if a Prez. Hillary could plan to get rid of the Bill of Rights through executive order, then ...


2 posted on 05/17/2018 6:44:18 AM PDT by Slyfox (Not my circus, not my monkeys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I wonder what effect there would be if some enterprising young kid like the guy who made the obama joker posters plastered some posters on the doors of urban planned parenthoods that say things like “funded by the DNC and Crime Busters of America to provide safer streets for liberal white hipsters”


3 posted on 05/17/2018 6:45:05 AM PDT by dsrtsage (For Leftists, World History starts every day at breakfast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Obama did daca which would result in cost. So if you can fund, you can defund. Alternatively, you can keep the funding but prohibit treasury from writing the check.


4 posted on 05/17/2018 6:48:08 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Can Trump defund Planned Parenthood through executive action?

Probably not. I'm sure there is a black-robed tyrant in Hawaii, Rhode Island, or Washington State who will issue a nationwide order forbidding such an action. It's right there in the Penumbra of the Constitution of the United States - "Whatever the Democrats whine for on any given day is the law of the land."

5 posted on 05/17/2018 6:51:46 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Can’t he reduce PP money by an amount that PP spends on political advertising of any kind?


6 posted on 05/17/2018 6:58:10 AM PDT by xzins (Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

And once they get it, “the issue is settled”. Even if the voters voted the other way (such as CA, three separate times, against sodomite mirage).


7 posted on 05/17/2018 7:01:02 AM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I think that’s what president Bush did.


8 posted on 05/17/2018 7:02:15 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Unless Congress changes the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, a president probably can’t halt funds more than temporarily. But the point should be for a president to force a roll count vote in Congress on funds for noxious purposes.


9 posted on 05/17/2018 7:02:20 AM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Pres Trump may take a page out of Ronald Reagan’s playbook (a move upheld by the USSC):

Opponents of abortion are urging the administration to bring back Reagan-era abortion restrictions on federal family planning dollars that would target Planned Parenthood.

The regulations would ban organizations that receive family planning dollars under the Title X Family Planning Program, which funds organizations providing services like birth control to low-income women and men, from promoting abortion or referring patients for abortions.

Former President Reagan first issued the regulations, which Democrats describe as a “domestic gag rule,” in 1988.

They also require a physical and financial separation of Title X funding recipients from abortion providers.


10 posted on 05/17/2018 7:12:19 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes. Next question.


11 posted on 05/17/2018 7:41:50 AM PDT by StAntKnee (Add your own danged sarc tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Yes. Next question.”

Which ought to be, I guess: “Should he?”

An that leads us to go both ways. Yes, if he wants to annoy his enemies and the press (I repeat myself); no, if he wants to avoid looking like Obama, ruling by fiat.


12 posted on 05/17/2018 7:50:29 AM PDT by StAntKnee (Add your own danged sarc tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

$500,000,000 of taxpayers’ money stolen so as to have murdering of babies and, then, chopping them into parts for sell to the highest bidder. Sick! Pathetic! Criminal! Murder!


13 posted on 05/17/2018 9:04:51 AM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

As aprincipled conservative, I hate to see a President usurp Congress’s role. Congress needs to do this. Trump has his bully pulpit, but he should not be funing or de-funding private companies.


14 posted on 05/17/2018 10:22:42 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (Stop the Mueller Gestapo. Free the Donald!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free
As aprincipled conservative, I hate to see a President usurp Congress’s role. Congress needs to do this.

Yeah that has worked out great so far.

15 posted on 05/17/2018 11:06:38 PM PDT by itsahoot (Welcome to the New USA where Islam is a religion of peace and Christianity is a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

No, Congress has failed miserably, but that is not a lisence to violate the Constitution’s restrictions on separation of powers. The left cheats, lies, and steals, and believes the ends justifies the means. We dont get that luxury. It makes the left hard to fight, but we combat that somewhat with conviction and moral high ground.

We dont get to shred the Constitution like the left does. If we do, then we have no basis left for our fight.


16 posted on 05/18/2018 9:20:38 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (Stop the Mueller Gestapo. Free the Donald!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free
It makes the left hard to fight, but we combat that somewhat with conviction and moral high ground.

Not hard, impossible but you are free to believe the left will respond to reason.

All the illegal immoral happenings have taken place under the Current Constitution, how has that happened? You have out of control intelligence agencies running rough shod over the American people. You have politicians earning a $150,000.00 or so a year becoming multi millionaires in a couple terms and no one seems to make the connection, or even become upset, as long as they get theirs.

You keep on waving that paper around like a battered wife waving her restraining order to the husband as he chokes the life out of her, we will lose the Republic forever. First the violent husband needs to be restrained.

17 posted on 05/18/2018 9:45:16 AM PDT by itsahoot (Welcome to the New USA where Islam is a religion of peace and Christianity is a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson