Is All Fair in Abortion and Politics?

 

Planned Parenthood exaggerates impact of abortion clinic regulations to raise money

 

By Dave Andrusko
NRL News Today has written on a number of occasions about why various Planned Parenthood clinics have closed. In light of slew of dire pro-abortion warnings that recent pro-life legislation will close massive numbers of abortion clinics, we’ll talk more at length today.

By way of preface, remember that (a) PPFA is a gigantic money-making “non-profit” machine, happy to close or consolidate smaller clinics that aren’t as profitable and invest the money in megaclinics; (b) while nearly all refer (perhaps to other nearby Planned Parenthood megaclinics) not every Planned Parenthood clinic performs abortions; (c) their clinics can close because—contrary to congratulatory media hype—there are substandard PPFA clinics that slide by because no one was watching (see Delaware); and (d) in the last couple of days, the usual suspects have partially walked-back the absurd assertion that upgrading the requirements abortion clinics must meet will rip through the abortion industry like a forest fire through thru dry timber.

In reverse order, take this headline from Reuters—“Why many abortion clinics in Texas may stay open despite new law: Most of the Texas clinics that abortion rights advocates predict will close because of a new law requiring tighter health and safety standards likely will remain open–at least if history is any guide.”

That’s a mouthful of a headline but it cuts to the chase. Lisa Maria Garza explains that Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Missouri have passed similar laws. “In those three states, however, most clinics were able to stay open after the laws passed, some by reallocating dollars to comply with building upgrades, according to abortion providers and state health department officials interviewed by Reuters.”
Of course, pro-abortion organizations deny that any of the improvements they made because of the new laws were needed–”They had to spend large sums of money to comply that otherwise would have been put into patient care,” Susan Frietsche, senior staff attorney at the Women’s Law Project, told Garza—but only the willfully blind believe that for two seconds.

Even the in-house source of statistics for the abortion industry admitted the portrait is overdrawn. “Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute, which favors abortion rights but does research cited by both sides, said the new law will have an impact in Texas but maybe less than the worst fears,” Garza reported. “’Clinics will close,’ she said. ‘But I can’t say we are going to go down to six.’” Six, by the way, is obviously a worse/worst-case scenario.
But that doesn’t mean you won’t read (over and over) gross misrepresentations of what is taking place—and, more importantly, why.

 

For example, Laura Bassett is essentially a stenographer for the abortion industry, posing as a reporter for Huffington Post. The headline to her story was “Planned Parenthood To Close Three Texas Clinics.” The clarification at the very end is incredibly telling:

“This piece was updated to clarify the reasons for the closure of each clinic. An original version implied that all were being closed in response to the signing of the new abortion law”

Two of the Planned Parenthood clinics didn’t perform abortions and so really wouldn’t be affected by the law which doesn’t take effect until next year anyway. Chances are, not performing abortions, those clinics just weren’t bringing in enough money for Planned Parenthood to justify keeping them open. And as for the other, just because a given clinic is closing doesn’t mean it won’t re-open—and soon.
Planned Parenthood and its pro-abortion sisterhood are garnering publicity in what is surely a set up for raising money off of the passage of HB 2. If they happen to grotesquely exaggerate the impact on the law on abortion clinics, well, from their perspective, all’s fair in love and abortion politics.

Sourcs: NRLC News