Why the vote to defund Planned Parenthood failed

A fifth graphic video was released from Houston Tuesday, one day after a Senate vote to defund Planned Parenthood failed.

|
Lauren Victoria Burke/AP
Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, speaks to reporters about Planned Parenthood on Monday, Aug. 3, 2015 on Capitol Hill in Washington.

The Senate vote Monday on Sen. Joni Ernst’s bill to defund Planned Parenthood effectively failed. The bill was sparked by the four undercover videos filmed by the Center for Medical Progress, which show Planned Parenthood employees discussing the potential sale of tissue from aborted fetuses. The bill failed to obtain the necessary 60 votes to clear the threat of a filibuster, with a final vote of 53 to 46, stalling the legislation for now.

The vote split mostly along party lines, with two Democratic senators voting largely with the Republican majority, while only one Republican joined the Democrats. However, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell changed his vote to “no” in order to preserve the ability to bring the bill up again. Only one senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, missed the vote.

Planned Parenthood’s president, Cecile Richards, characterized the vote to prevent the organization from receiving more than $500 million annually from the federal government as an attack on women.

“Attacking this funding is attacking women who need preventive health care, including women who need cancer screenings and contraception. Congress should not allow politics to get in the way of lifesaving care,” Ms. Richards wrote in an opinion piece in The Washington Post.

But Republicans in the Senate highlighted the fact that the bill didn’t remove any funding for women’s health, but rather reallocated the funding that Planned Parenthood would typically receive to other community health centers around the nation.

While Republicans almost unanimously supported the bill, some felt as though the vote was coming too soon.

“It would be premature to totally defund Planned Parenthood immediately until we know more facts,” said Sen. Susan Collins, (R) of Maine, in a press release discussing her own legislation. Senator Collins’s alternative bill would have directed the Department of Justice to investigate Planned Parenthood for any legal violations, and report back to the Senate within 90 days. However, as debate for the Ernst bill did not obtain the necessary 60 votes to clear the procedural hurdle, discussion could not be opened on Collins' alternative bill either.

While the bill has stalled on the Senate side, and the House has recessed for the month of August, the videos are likely to be topic of discussion in the upcoming weeks that congressmen spend with their constituents. An additional video was released from Houston Tuesday. Additionally, the House will likely vote on its own legislation to defund Planned Parenthood, by removing Title X funding from the group. The family planning organization under fire is largely funded through Medicaid and Title X dollars. Congress has more discretion over Title X funding than over Medicaid funding, which is controlled jointly by the federal government and by state governments.

With the 2016 presidential election and congressional re-elections about 16 months away, both pro-life and pro-choice organizations are seizing on the concentrated attention on the abortion debate to galvanize support for their respective positions. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why the vote to defund Planned Parenthood failed
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2015/0805/Why-the-vote-to-defund-Planned-Parenthood-failed
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe