Governor Walker Defunds Planned Parenthood, and Governor Kasich May Do So Next

Today, Governor Scott Walker continued to take a stand for life as he signed two bills into law which essentially defund Planned Parenthood in his state.

Walker has been an unapologetic defender of unborn life in the Badger State. In July of 2015, the then-presidential hopeful signed a 20 week abortion ban into law. This morning he signed AB 310/SB 237 and SB 238/AB 311, both of which direct taxpayer funds away from Planned Parenthood. As reported by Alliance Defending Freedom:

SB 237 directs public funding to providers of comprehensive health services for women and families instead of to abortion businesses such as Planned Parenthood. SB 238 prevents abortion businesses from overbilling Medicaid for prescription drugs, thereby denying Planned Parenthood profits from taxpayers. Wisconsin is the ninth state to take action in recent months to strip taxpayer dollars from the abortion giant.

The ongoing impact of the videos from the Center for Medical Progress, showing the horrific behind-the-scenes actions of the abortion provider, continues in Wisconsin and elsewhere. Planned Parenthood obviously decries today's measures by Walker, saying they are being singled out. They would be right. Unlike what the Left/mainstream media, "champion for all" candidate Hillary Clinton, and Planned Parenthood itself tells you, they are not a necessity. Yes, women's healthcare is and should be a priority, just like care for men, children, the elderly, and veterans. But Planned Parenthood does not fall under the umbrella of health. When one of the "services" you provide involves ending the life of another, then you've completely lost claim to the designation of being pro-health.

The health of women has not been forgotten or neglected in Wisconsin, or any other state that has taken or will take a stand against Planned Parenthood.

On March 2, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which challenges Texas’ 2013 abortion law. Beyond deciding the constitutionality of a law that could shut down about half of the state’s 19 remaining abortion clinics, the Texas abortion case gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to clarify how far states can go in restricting abortion.

In 1992, the court ruled that states can impose abortion restrictions as long as they do not place an undue burden on a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion.

Lower courts across the country have disagreed, however, on what constitutes an “undue burden.” Activists on all sides are hoping the high court will provide a clearer definition in its decision in the Texas case. That case centers on the state’s requirement that abortion clinics meet hospital-like ambulatory surgical center standards — which include minimum sizes for rooms and doorways, pipelines for anesthesia and other modifications. In June, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld the new abortion restrictions, saying the new law does not impose an undue burden on a majority of Texas women seeking abortions.

Justice Anthony Kennedy could be the swing vote. If he sides with the conservatives on the court, the resulting 4-4 tie would affirm the lower court ruling.

The lower court also granted the relatively remote Whole Woman’s Health in McAllen an exemption to some narrow elements of the ambulatory surgical center requirements and from a separate provision of the law that requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of an abortion clinic.

Barring a tied vote, a decision in the Texas case could also determine the constitutionality of restrictions in place in other areas of the country. As of November, 10 states had adopted admitting privileges requirements, but courts blocked enforcement in six of those states, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights. Six states had enacted ambulatory surgical center standards on abortion facilities. Those restrictions were not in effect in two of those states.

Let Planned Parenthood do it’s disgusting thing.

The bottom line: not a single penny of taxpayer money should be spent supporting this business (yes, it is a business). Let them raise money like any other (for lack of proper words) charity.

Let them raise money from donors who wish to support them.

Fleecing the taxpayer into supporting a practice they disapprove of is criminal.

It’s grandstanding because Kasich doesn’t give a darn about abortion but he suddenly realized that this could help him. So it won’t be his downfall.

That said, I wish Walker had stayed in the game. He was my favorite because he managed to resist very powerful union forces in his state and he also identified the problems. He was a Christian but wasn’t pretending to be “born again” or the follower of some particular pastor or whatever seems to be the current standard.

I wouldn’t vote for Kasich (although I fear he will be the candidate) and I suspect Bush will be gone next week so that reduces the field.

I’d vote for Rubio or Cruz, but I’ll stay home for Trump.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.