Green Room

Real question: Does Obama’s budget fund overseas abortions to protect endangered animals?

posted at 11:27 am on March 6, 2014 by

No, seriously — does it?  I know, I know: The question itself sounds like a stupid conservative caricature of liberal excess. But a friend sent along the text of the following provision, which is buried on page 930 of the president’s FY 2015 budget proposal.  She thought it looked “fishy.”  I must agree:

Perhaps a budget expert can steer me in the right direction here, but that passage certainly reads like a proposal to allocate $575 million in taxpayer dollars to fund abortions (“reproductive health” is the correct euphemism, yes?) in corners of the globe where human population growth is deemed (by whom?) to be “threatening” plants and animals.  A creepy Malthusian dystopia. I keep trying to convince myself that I must be misinterpreting this, but I also remember that upon entering office, President Obama appointed a “science czar” with a disturbing paper trail.  In a 2009 Politifact analysis – which rated some conservative criticisms of John Holdren “pants on fire” false — the left-leaning fact-checkers conceded that Holdren did, in fact, co-author a volume that discussed a number of radical population control measures:

In a section on “Involuntary Fertility Control,” Holdren and the other authors discuss various “coercive” means of population control — including putting sterilants in the drinking water. But they stop well short of advocating such measures…Later, the authors conclude, “Most of the population control measures beyond family planning discussed above have never been tried. Some are as yet technically impossible and others are and probably will remain unacceptable to most societies … “Compulsory control of family size is an unpalatable idea, but the alternatives may be much more horrifying”…The authors argue that compulsory abortions could potentially be allowed under U.S. law “if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” Again, that’s a far cry from advocating or proposing such a position.

The point of dredging this up is not to relitigate the Holdren controversy; it’s simply a reminder that the Obama administration has embraced some rather extreme figures and policy positions on these issues.  So again I ask, with all sincerity: Does the president’s new budget propose funding overseas abortions to combat “threats” to “biodiversity”?  Or am I missing something?  Maybe this idea is limited to various forms of birth control, which is covered by the “family planning” distinction. But as I noted above, “reproductive health” is one of the Left’s code words for abortion. One of this president’s first official acts was to lift the federal restriction on subsidizing abortions abroad, so he’s unlikely to harbors any moral qualms on this.  In any case, what’s the explanation for the environmentalist stipulations?

UPDATE – A Capitol Hill budget maven notes that President Bush’s last budget contained somewhat similar language, but within the context of fighting AIDS, not saving the planet. The Bush administration also barred taxpayer funds from financing overseas abortions.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…are they opening new Planed Parenthood offices in other countries?

KOOLAID2 on March 6, 2014 at 12:50 PM

They might be surmounting some sort of legalistic barrier. Txfr’ing funds from this to animal/enviromental activists under the premise of health concerns may be expedited with that language – I dunno.

Recon5 on March 6, 2014 at 2:18 PM

…are they opening new Planed Parenthood offices in other countries?

KOOLAID2 on March 6, 2014 at 12:50 PM

The most growth successful (and evil) form of crony capitalism to date? Surely. Probably calling it “Biodiversity Services” or some such. But come on, we know what they’re really doing. Killing babies to stop global warming. Smart power finesse.
Just doesn’t have the intended messaging ring. Also jumps out quicker on pages above 500.

onomo on March 7, 2014 at 7:32 AM

Great, now Zero is murdering thousands of babies to protect some kind insect in a mud puddle somewhere.

Guarantee you Putin wouldn’t do this.

Pablo Honey on March 7, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Here in the Philippines, the Obama team is using US taxpayer money to meddle re. abortion, the environment, & homosexual activism.

itsnotaboutme on March 7, 2014 at 6:30 PM

The Left has an advantage in such issues, because they love spending tax dollars on their causes.

If, say, Bobby Jindal were to be elected president in 2016 (please, God!), would he throw taxpayer money all over the globe to promote a so-con agenda?
That would be violating one conservative standard to promote another.

itsnotaboutme on March 7, 2014 at 6:33 PM

I most strongly hope it does. At least, Obama would be doing one thing right.

thuja on March 7, 2014 at 10:59 PM

If the EPA were to declare Homo sapiens as an endangered species, all of these problems would go away.

percysunshine on March 8, 2014 at 10:34 AM

The Green Room is reduced to two articles, is it even necessary?

John the Libertarian on March 9, 2014 at 3:26 AM