Bush vs. pro-choice
U.S. nixes $ for global women's health
By Sue Davis
The United States has done it again. Though the Bush
administration claims to care about women, a recent action
reveals just the opposite.
The Bush administration announced July 22 that it would not
give $34 million, allotted by Congress last winter, to the
United Nations Population Fund. The program provides
reproductive resources for women in 142 countries.
The U.S. refusal is based on its claim that the UN-funded
programs in China had "knowingly supported or participated in
the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary
sterilization."
Yet that charge was totally disowned by a State Department
fact-finding mission that visited China in May.
Why would the Bush administration discount its own
report?
Because it wants to exercise its muscle as the world's
supercilious super-bully and export its domestic
holier-than-thou anti-abortion agenda. And in the process it is
only too happy to take a swipe at both the UN and People's
China.
Yet such arrogance only exposes the Bush administration's
double standard. If it was sincere about stopping "coercive
abortion and involuntary sterilization," it would take a look
at its own backyard and address the many economic and social
factors that force poor young women, especially women of color,
to have abortions and become sterilized in this country.
One of its first conclusions would then be to dump the
so-called "welfare reform law" instead of calling for tougher
provisions, and immediately provide abundant resources for all
needy women with dependent children.
The European Union voted on July 23 to provide $31.8 million
to fill the void Bush created. "The decision to cut funding,"
said Poul Nielson, the European commissioner for aid, "may well
lead to more unwanted pregnancies, unsafe abortions and
increased dangers for mothers and infants."
Dr. Steven W. Sinding, the new director general of the
International Planned Parenthood Federation, noted: "The
saddest thing is that this domestic political debate has such a
profound impact around the world. Women suffer deeply. There
will always be unwanted pregnancies, especially among women in
poverty and women so young that their pelvises are not yet
formed to the point where they can safely deliver a child. To
condemn [girls aged 14, 15 or 16] to bear a child that may very
well cause them to die is just morally indefensible."
But denying the consequences of reproductive aid to women
doesn't seem to bother the Bush administration. Isn't that the
ultimate hypocrisy? And proof-positive of how little it cares
about women!
Though the State Department announced that the $34 million
will be distributed by its Agency for International
Development, there's no guarantee it will be funneled into
programs designed to help impoverished women improve their
lives and their health.
Reprinted from the Aug. 15, 2002, issue of
Workers World newspaper
This article is copyrighted
under a Creative
Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe to WW by Email: wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Donate to
support pro-labor, anti-war news.
Email
this article
Printable
page