abortions but not school vouchers
In my last article, a somber remembrance of Roe v. Wade, I called
attention to something that shocked readers: I noted that the Obama
administration and Democratic Congress "rejected funding for school
vouchers for poor children in Washington, DC, but supported funding for
abortions for the mothers of those children."
The contrast is breathtaking, but true. It's another jolt to
traditionally minded voters — especially pro-life Democrats and
independents — who voted for "change" on November 4, 2008, and are now
absorbing the change they authorized. In this case, the change stands
in stark contrast to previous administrations and Congresses that
prohibited federal funds to finance abortions in the District of
Columbia. It veers well beyond liberals' assurance that abortion merely
be "safe, legal, and rare."
If you didn't hear about this until now, don't be surprised. Over
300,000 pro-lifers marched in Washington last month without notice by
the mainstream media. So, I'd like to take a moment to explain what
Last summer, in July 2009, the overwhelmingly Democratic House of
Representatives narrowly passed (by a vote of 219-208) a bill
permitting the DC government to use locally raised tax revenues to
provide abortions, reversing a long-standing prohibition.
Almost all Republicans voted against the bill. They were joined by some
(but not enough) Democrats. Unfortunately, because of how Americans
voted on November 4, 2008, the extreme left has such a massive majority
in Congress that legislators who think taxpayers shouldn't pay for
abortions couldn't stop the measure from being passed. Worse, because
Americans — who, in recent polls, describe themselves as more pro-life
and more conservative than ever — voted for the most radical
abortion-rights advocate in the history of the presidency, the bill had
full backing from the White House.
And so, the change in favor of abortion funding came via a $768 million
DC Financial Services Appropriations bill that — here's the kicker —
also included termination of school vouchers for poor children in
Washington, DC, forcing those children out of private schools and back
into public schools they fled.
Most Americans didn't notice any of this, given that the mainstream
media that serves as educator-in-chief didn't dare highlight the story.
Two sources that did notice, however, are worth quoting:
One is Rep. Joe Pitts, the Pennsylvania congressman who is a stalwart
champion for the unborn. Pitts told me: "It's shameful that Congress
has decided to use taxpayer dollars to fund the destruction of life in
our nation's capital but has denied funding for a successful
scholarship program that allows poor children a chance at a decent
education. The juxtaposition in policies could not be more disturbing."
More disturbed than Pitts was Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic
League, who was fit to be tied: "Following the lead of President Barack
Obama," said Donohue, "the House of Representatives passed a bill that
would allow the District of Columbia to fund abortions. Also following
Obama's wishes, the same bill affirmed the...congressional decision to
end school vouchers there."
"Here's what it comes down to," summed up Donohue. Poor pregnant women
living in Washington, DC, "will be told that if they decide to abort
their baby, the government will pay for it. But if they persist in
bringing their baby to term, the government will not help them to avoid
the same lousy public schools that Barack and Michelle shunned for
Sasha and Malia." Donohue denounced the action as "cruel."
No doubt, it's an outrage. Of course, it's also predictable. By and
large, liberals oppose school vouchers but support legalized abortion.
In that sense, this is nothing new.
What is new, however, is this sudden aggressive push by today's
"progressives" for taxpayers to fund abortions. This is the culmination
of a progressive death march begun a century ago by Planned Parenthood
founder and racial eugenicist Margaret Sanger, who preached extraction
of "human weeds" from the gene pool in order to advance "race
improvement" (her words). Today's progressive heirs have taken Sanger's
torch and lit up the barn.
And thus, we now have — in no less than the nation's capital — a
poster-child for that grim progressive worldview. It's a child who
doesn't get aid to go to a private school — even as his mother pays
school taxes — but whose mother gets aid to abort the child's sibling.
We're not only losing our conscience as a nation; we're losing our mind.
I know the response I'll get from Democrats: furious emails, enraged at
me. That's sad. I'm simply reporting what happened. I didn't vote for
any of this. I plead with them: If you're angry, write to the people in
your party who are responsible. Only you can stop this madness. Clean
your own house.
Contact: Dr. Paul Kengor
February 4, 2010
to a friend.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly. Click here to learn more about the IFRL.