Not all Republicans are out to federally defund Planned Parenthood. Nope, three prominent Republicans have just come over from the "dark side" in the name of women's health.
It takes guts to cross party lines and to stand up in opposition to the GOP's proposed and ill-planned cuts to Planned Parenthood's funding. However, Planned Parenthood offers health services to all women, not just a select group, and these women understand that. The federal monies cannot be used to fund abortion services, so this really boils down to a debate over whether we think all women should have access to affordable family planning and preventative health services. It may seem like a no-brainer, but not when politics get involved.
Of course there are other female Republican dissenters -- including Judy Biggert of Illinois and Mary Bono Mack of California -- but let's look at (and applaud) some of the most recent Republican women to stand up for Planned Parenthood.
Who are these rad Republican women?
Former Gov. Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey
Whitman, who served as EPA administrator during the George W. Bush administration, is calling on her party to retain federal funding for Planned Parenthood. In an op-ed piece in the Bergen Record, Whitman wrote:
As a former governor, I understand that this country faces a growing deficit and we must exercise fiscal discipline. As a Republican, I also understand that women, no matter their party affiliation, are concerned about the health of their mothers, their daughters, and their sisters.
That's why I am concerned that social conservatives are trying to hijack the budget process to include proposals that would wipe out access to family planning, HIV testing and counseling, and breast and cervical cancer screening for millions of American women.
Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
Murkowski was the first Senator in more than 50 years to win an election with a write-in campaign, and she recently voted in support of the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." In a letter to Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Murkowski wrote:
I believe Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with their funding cuts in the bill. I ask you to consider these programs going forward to determine if there is room for allowing continued funding.
Senator Susan Collins of Maine
Collins is often described as a "moderate" and is considered one of the Senate’s most liberal Republicans. In regard to the cuts, Collins' spokesman said:
Senator Collins is a longtime supporter of the Title X Family Planning Program, and she believes the House’s decision to completely eliminate the funding is unwise. The program has successfully reduced the number of unplanned pregnancies, therefore helping to reduce health care costs.
Indeed, hundreds of women count on Planned Parenthood for birth control. Revoking community access to this service is only bad for our overall health care costs, which include the many costly repercussions of unplanned pregnancies.
The Title X Family Planning Program is the only federal program dedicated to reproductive health issues and is currently funded at $317 million, money that would be revoked if Republicans are successful.
When was the last time you crossed your party lines for an issue that was important to you?
Image via WeNews
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
This Hot Dad Wants to Cook You Dinner
This Hot Dad Cooks AND Does the Dishes
Kanye West is Gay?! 
Comments 24
My only concern is doubling up... From the looks of things now- the healthcare bill covers ALL of this care- Planned Parenthood should be able to bill for it via the healthcare bill as services provided. I do not believe they should get additional funding on top of what will already be provided- and women will be able to go to other places that work with the healthcare program once it is available. Paying them twice does not make sense to me.
Unless the healthcare bill is found unconstitutional- I don't see the need to fund them in this manner any more. However, if the bill is repealed, then PP should remain opened for healthcare and contraceptives. I do not believe that tax money should be used for abortions, however.
Glad some republicans have a brain in their head. If they don't want abortions to happen then closing PP is going to have the complete opposite affect. Also,if I am SICK of comments shaming women for having sex. As if that is the only reason abortions happen. There a millions are reasons that abortions are so prevalent and it goes so much deeper then people having sex.
Historymama, for one the healthcare bill isn't even active yet so talking about what it will cover does nothing in the scheme of cutting Planned Parenthoods funding. And Angidas I agree, I hear so many times "if you can't afford it don't have sex". thats so high and mighty because from the dawn of time people have had sex and women are so quick to condemn other women. Why not go after your precious sons who are doing "it" too. from the time my son is old enough he will understand safe sex as well. I joke that an economy sized box of condoms will take up residence in our bathroom when he turns 12 to illustrate the point!
And I cross party lines all the time because I am an issues kind of person. It all depends on what the issue is, i don't "toe the line" simply because I'm a democrat or republican
I agree entirely with HistoryMama - Obamacare (which will hopefully be dismantled due to the fact that it most certainly is unconstitutional) entirely negates the necessity for Planned Parenthood funding. There is absolutely no arguement to be made that supports double-funding when the nation is on the verge of bankruptcy.
It is a fact that we have a massive economic problem on our hands. The dollar, against other currency, is performing pathetically, and we keep printing paper money to "get us out". That doesn't work. What WILL work, both short and long term, is putting the budget under a microscope and analyzing everything that is there.
It is also a fact that PP has provided excellent resources for low-income women for most of its existence. Yes, it provides controversial abortions that are federally funded. And yes, I know, there is accounting magic that says that *these* dollars are spent on *this* program, and *those* dollars are spent on *that* program. But the fact remains that every dollar they receive is green, and when it's thrown into a big pile, you can't tell the difference between this privately donated dollar, and that federally provided dollar. It all goes into the same budget and is divided up from there.
At this point in time, we cannot look at the budget and declare, "this is sacred" for any item except, perhaps, for national defense. But even within national defense, there is likely a lot of chaff that can be cut.
Once we get the budget under control and our country is solvent again, THEN we can start talking about providing "free" services again. But until then, women are going to have to accept that perhaps they need to start taking care of their own reproductive health, stop having irresponsible sex, or start paying for some of those services out of their own pockets.
Anon... my son goes to a private school. I pay for that AND I pay taxes to fund the public schools. Since you've brought it up, I think the entire educational system is shameful, wastes buckets of money, and should be one of the first things facing massive overhaul. I think that people who send their children to public schools should pay their tax dollars DIRECTLY to the school their child attends. That would cut down on a massive amount of waste and corruption. Thank you for asking.
Did you read where I acknowledged that PP has done some excellent work? I had a friend who caught her uterine cancer, thanks to screenings provided her by PP. Thanks in part to them, she was able to treat it, and counts herself among the survivors. So I understand that they do provide a service to a significant part of the population.
But it's also been proven that they have handed out the absolute worst-rated, highest-failure-rate condoms ever made, videos have shown workers advising pimps on how to keep their underage, illegal immigrant sex workers in prostitution, and they are activists for performing surgical procedures on underage girls without parental consent.
And many women do use their low-cost abortion services as a method of birth control. When you consider an organization, you must consider ALL sides of it, and not just the good things that it does. Especially when it is funded by a federal government that is, for all intents and purposes, bankrupt.
SassyKat- actually, the healthcare bill IS active... of course it is rolling in stages. And you CAN know what it is going to cover by reading the bill. There is a specific section regarding this particular care- you can jump on over to government webpage and see for yourself.
I did note that I was weary of the constitutional aspect, and that if it doesn't come to play- then we should still have PP... without government funded abortions.
Planned parenthood does some great things- but it does some not so great things as well. I don't think they should just get a blanket approval just because some good comes from it... that is not responsible on our part.