The new rule - which mirrors a Reagan-era regulation from the 1980s - would impose a "bright line" of physical and financial separation between taxpayer-funded family planning programs and "any program or facility where abortion is performed, supported, or referred for as a method of family planning", an administration official said. This is an exaggeration and typical of the pro-abortion faction's response to this rule.
INSKEEP: She was president of Planned Parenthood for 12 years before stepping down last month.
The proposal, submitted by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to the Office of Management and Budget for review Friday, sought to restrict federally funded health clinics from offering or referring patients for abortions.
The rule is reportedly similar to a Reagan-era rule that didn't go into effect as written. It is an indication of the rightward lurch of the entire political establishment that Nixon's promise now stands in stark contrast to Trump's reactionary rule.
"The end result would make it impossible for women to come to Planned Parenthood, who are counting on us every day", said the organization's executive vice president, Dawn Laguens.
How this "disentanglement" would work in practice exposes the falsity of such claims. According to the above email, a clinic providing other services could get funding by simply stopping to provide abortion as well.
"So any changes that would exclude Great Plains from the Title X program or seeing those patients would leave 10,000 patients without sexual and reproductive health care", Hill said.
Democrats and abortion provider Planned Parenthood strongly condemned the decision, casting it as the Republicans' latest attack on abortion rights.
Planned Parenthood clinics also qualify for Title X grants, but they must keep the family-planning money separate from funds used to pay for abortions.
While the change does not affect the level of funding the government is providing, it has raised some alarms about how hard it would be for smaller, community-based providers to absorb the vast number of patients served by Planned Parenthood, should its funding be denied.
Monica Burke, a research assistant at The Heritage Foundation's Institute for Family, Community, and Opportunity, noted that the funds targeted by Trump are small potatoes compared to the $1.5 billion that Planned Parenthood received in federal reimbursements from 2013 to 2015.
INSKEEP: So let me put an opposing view at you and get your response to it.
So if Trump administration issues new funding guidelines for Title X, the only federal entitlement program that funds birth control, it will not meaningfully affect the relationship between taxpayer dollars and abortions in the US.
Abortion foes have been extraordinarily successful at the state level in recent years at limiting access to abortion. It will certainly not be the 2.5m mostly-poor women who use Planned Parenthood's services, which also include testing for STIs and cancer-screening.
Trump's assault on abortion and reproductive health care is of a piece with the administration's assault on health care in general. So, for the many health centers and patients that rely on this program for their contraceptive care, these changes will leave them with no alternatives. "He & @SecAzar are making it official government policy by blocking patients from care at Planned Parenthood, allowing doctors to withhold abortion info from patients, & putting women's health at risk". As the New York Times noted a week ago. The law is so controversial because many women don't even realize they're pregnant prior to the six-week point, and some abortion providers don't offer abortion care prior to this point in the pregnancy either.
This week, more than 200 members of Congress - including Sens.
Skinner said about 45,000 people a year go to Planned Parenthood of Southern New England for medical services.
While Trump seeks to deny women's health care services, the USA maternal mortality rate has increased by more than 50 percent since 1990, placing the nation in the company of some of the world's poorest nations in sub-Saharan Africa. "Either way, this will loosen the group's hold on tens of millions of tax dollars", he added.