The First in a Series of Attacks on Pro-Life Policies
President Obama's order will put hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of organizations that aggressively promote abortion as a population-control tool in the developing world.
Obama's order overturns the "Mexico City Policy," under which funds in the U.S. "population assistance" program go only to overseas organizations that pledge not to "perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning."
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), commented, "This is the first in an anticipated series of attacks on longstanding pro-life policies, as the new administration pushes Obama's sweeping abortion agenda.? That agenda includes repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which would result in tax-funded abortion as a birth control method in the U.S., and imposition of sweeping pro-abortion mandates on private employers through health-care reform legislation.
"One effect of Obama's order will be to divert many millions of dollars away from groups that do not promote abortion, and into the hands of those organizations that are the most aggressive in promoting abortion in developing countries.? President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control."
Contrary to some misunderstandings, enforcement of the Mexico City Policy did not reduce the amount of money spent on the program, nor will Obama's order increase the amount (which is $461 million in the current fiscal year).? Rather, the policy affects what type of groups qualify for grants under the program.? "Obama's order will predictably result in a redirection of funds to groups such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which are ideologically committed to the doctrine that abortion on demand must be universally available as a birth control method," Johnson said.
Although Obama's order will result in major subsidies for organizations that promote abortion overseas, the direct use of the U.S. funds to perform abortion procedures will remain unlawful under the Helms Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act.? "The Helms Amendment can be changed only by an act of Congress, but because the Obama Administration is joined at the hip with the abortion lobby, we will be watching carefully for any evidence that the Administration is failing to enforce the Helms Amendment," Johnson said.
The details of the Mexico City Policy are spelled out in an official handbook issued by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which is available on request from NRLC (in PDF format).? Basically, the policy required grantees to refrain from performing abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest), or lobbying to legalize abortion, or otherwise promoting abortion as a family-planning method.? The policy explicitly allowed responding to questions about where abortions may be obtained, in countries in which abortions are legal.

G-d willing, let's hope so.
Why do you refer to "the U.S. 'population assistance' program"? I don't know what that program is. The Mexico City Policy applies/applied to federal funding to NGOs. It was announced by Reagan at the 1984 UN International Conference on Population, so maybe that is the source of the mix-up. I don't believe there is any specific program with funding for "population assistance," whatever that means, but if you know of one I'd be very interested to see some details.
I also think that Johnson's statements are misleading, particularly the reference to "groups that promote abortion as a method of population control." Any time someone makes a choice about getting pregnant, not getting pregnant, carrying a pregnancy to term, or not carrying the pregnancy to term, they are doing something that controls the population. Granted, these decisions are on an individual level, so it may seem like no one really has "control" -- but that's the level on which NGOs providing OB/GYN and prenatal services would be working, too. You make it sound as though there is some kind of conspiracy to abort a quota of fetuses -- this is obviously ridiculous.
Who knows, maybe this is a good time for the NRLC to rethink it's purpose. I recently read this article (link is at the end)
ct. 15, 2008 -- The U.S. ranks 29th worldwide in infant mortality, tying Slovakia and Poland but lagging behind Cuba, the CDC reports.
The CDC's latest estimates for international rankings are based on 2004 data. But as of 2005, the numbers haven't changed much since 2000.
Nearly seven U.S. babies die out of every 1,000 live births. More than 28,000 American babies die before their first birthday.
"The U.S. infant mortality rate is higher than rates in most other developed countries," note CDC researchers Marian F. MacDorman, PhD, and T.J. Mathews. "The relative position of the United States in comparison to countries with the lowest infant mortality rates appears to be worsening."
What's going on? Racial and ethnic disparities clearly play a role. In 2005, for every 1,000 live births, the infant mortality rate was:
* 13.63 among non-Hispanic black Americans
* 5.76 among non-Hispanic white Americans
Premature birth is a factor in more than two-thirds of infant deaths. From 2000 to 2005, the U.S. preterm birth rate went up from 11.6% to 12.7%.
Rather than spend so much time, energy and resources (both human and financial) on stopping women from having abortions, why not dedicate yourselves to helping solve some of the problems above? There are millions of women wanting to have babies and are facing real obstacles and traumas as the numbers above show.
Just something to consider.
The whole article can be found here.
http://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20081015/infant-mortality-us-ranks-29th