House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to remove all $100 million in

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by dianetavegia, Jul 17, 2003.

  1. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    FRIDAY FAX

    July 18, 2003
    Volume 6, Number 30

    US House eliminates $100 million earmarked for UN Population Fund

    In a stinging defeat for the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the US
    House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to remove all $100 million in
    proposed funding for UNFPA from the US foreign aid bill, despite a massive
    lobbying campaign carried out on Capitol Hill by UNFPA's American allies.

    The House vote was extremely close, 216-211, but still appears to
    show a significant shift in opinion regarding the legitimacy of UNFPA. The
    last full House vote on UNFPA was in 1999, during which UNFPA received a
    majority of support, 221 to 198.

    According to Representative Christopher Smith (R-NJ), a co-sponsor
    of the amendment to remove the UNFPA funding, continuing revelations of
    UNFPA's involvement in coercive population control programs, especially in
    China, have undermined US political support for the agency. Speaking
    during debate this week, Smith asserted, "since 1979, the UN Population
    Fund (UNFPA) has been the chief apologist for
    China's coercive one-child-per-couple policy...the women of China are
    being oppressed with great impunity by their government."

    Smith continued, "This debate is all about coercion. I would hope
    that my friends who support abortion would realize that coercion, whether
    it be forced sterilization or forced abortion, is an unconscionable act;
    and when it is done with impunity by the Chinese government with their
    partner, the UN Population Fund, we need to disassociate ourselves from
    that kind of activity....I would hope that we would stand with the women
    of China who are being oppressed by their government and with their
    partners in these crimes against humanity, the UN Population Fund."

    In July, 2002, President Bush decided to withhold $34 million from
    UNFPA because of its ties to coercion. In order to render UNFPA eligible
    for renewed US funding, the House International Relations Committee in May
    attempted to weaken a long-standing US human rights law, called the
    Kemp-Kasten amendment, that forbids US support for coercive population
    control programs. 22 Democrats and 1 Republican voted for an amendment
    proposed by Joseph Crowley (D-NY) that sought to create a legal
    distinction between direct and indirect support for coercion. According to
    the Crowley amendment, only "direct" support for coercion would remain
    illegal. Since UNFPA does not carry out the coercion in China, itself,
    UNFPA should therefore receive the $100 million. This legal maneuvering
    did not prove convincing to the full House on Tuesday.

    When President Bush announced his 2002 decision against UNFPA, he
    was roundly condemned on editorial pages for being "anti-women." However,
    UNFPA and its allies have so far remained silent about Tuesday's House
    vote. UNFPA has yet to publicly acknowledge the decision, even though it
    represents a potentially crippling blow to the agency's finances.

    UNFPA's pro-abortion supporters in the House are expected to
    maintain their fight to refund the beleaguered agency.

    Copyright - C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute). Permission
    granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

    Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute
    866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 427
    New York, New York 10017
    Phone: (212) 754-5948 Fax: (212) 754-9291
    E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.c-fam.org
     
  2. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hopefully this is as good as it looks on the surface. But we need to check it out carefully to make shre that there aren't any cheap political tricks.

    It mentions what Bush did in 2002, but here is what he did:

    ""President Bush's recent decision to redirect $34 million in government funds from the United Nations' abortion coercion activities in China to USAID's abortifacient 'contraceptives' program is a purely political move with no consistency behind it," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "What he has given to pro-lifers with one hand, he has taken away with the other."

    Congress allocated up to $34 million in international family planning funds to the United Nations Population Fund. President Bush held back the funds when the UNFPA's participation in the coercive abortion and sterilization policies of the Chinese government was revealed. After eight months of deliberation, President Bush denied funding.

    Instead of redirecting funds to a worthier cause, the president chose to continue the UNFPA legacy by allocating the money to the USAID Child Survival and Health Program Fund. This fund includes money for "forecasting, purchasing, and supplying contraceptive commodities and other materials necessary for reproductive health programs."

    "These 'contraceptive commodities' are nothing but abortion-inducing chemicals that kill the very children that the fund claims to help," said Mrs. Brown. "President Bush made a good decision to deny the UNFPA American taxpayer money for forced abortions, but turned right around and stabbed us in the back by giving the $34 million to USAID."

    From: http://www.all.org/news/020723.htm


    Very typical.
     

Share This Page

Loading...