Balancing the Budget on the Backs of Women

image source

So, the Republicans in the House want to balance the budget and show their opposition to abortion. Thus, they have voted on a bill that will effectively cost the taxpayer more money in Medicaid healthcare dollars by increasing teen pregnancy, increasing sexually transmitted diseases, and  increasing unintended pregnancies among poor women. And it will increase abortions. Oh, and cancer too. And HIV and AIDS. Way to go!!!

The House voted this month to block federal funding to Planned Parenthood, a huge provider of reproductive healthcare to poor and uninsured women.  None of the federal funding received by Planned Parenthood goes toward providing abortion services. These services are provided out of a different fund altogether.  In addition, the House, in an Amendment drafted by Rep. Mike Pence (R., Ind.), voted to eliminate the entire Title X program, which was founded in 1970 and is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and preventive health services, particularly to low-income families. These services include  breast and cervical cancer screenings, HIV prevention, education, and screening, pregnancy diagnosis, and counseling.

This is not just an attack on abortion, which, if I remember correctly, is still legal in this country. It is an all-out attack on women's health. By eliminating Title X, millions of women will lose access to the only healthcare they now have. They will have no means of acquiring birth control and will be at risk of unintended pregnancy. They will have no access to early cancer screening and detection and will be at risk of developing more advanced disease. Teen pregnancy rates will increase, and many of these teens will go on to give birth, as their access to abortion services will be increasingly limited. And just how is this supposed to save the country money? It won't. It will cost. It will cost money, and it will cost lives. But, what is the worth of health to a disadvantaged woman compared to the worth of political rhetoric to a politician?