[Hugh Akston]

If one reads the bill, they find language such as this:

Provided further, That none of the funds made available in this Act nor any unobligated balances from prior appropriations may be made available to any organization or program which, as determined by the President of the United States, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization: Provided further, That none of the funds made available under this Act may be used to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions: Provided further, That none of the funds made available under this Act may be used to lobby for or against abortion: Provided further, That in order to reduce reliance on abortion in developing nations, funds shall be available only to voluntary family planning projects which offer, either directly or through referral to, or information about access to, a broad range of family planning methods and services,...

Etc etc etc.

[ejo]

Yes, and it must be reiterated once again. In interpretating the language I understand that the only restriction will be that such agencies must use the funds for treating people with AIDS. Further, any agency that provides treatment for AIDS will get the money as long as none of the funds are used for family planning purposes or for abortions==except in the case of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in danger. So why are so many getting into an uproar about this seemingly straight forward explanation???I personally feel it is a weapon that will be used to discredit President Bush by subjects that wish to see his downfall. So wake up! don't be mislead by Clintonesque rhetory. You recall his "is" interpretation , well now take a hard look and re-read the Bill and may cooler heads prevail.