In the end, President Barack Obama was the one who refused to blink on Planned Parenthood. Another way of saying it is this: The president was willing to shut down the entire federal government rather than see Planned Parenthood’s federal funding cut.
According to press accounts leaked by Democratic aides, House Speaker John Boehner argued for the funding cut late into the evening. The president answered, “Nope, zero.” He then said, “John, this is it.” Mr. Boehner accepted the budget deal without that cut.
A Republican aide confirmed more or less the same account to me. He said it was “chilling” to see how inflexible Mr. Obama was. You might call it ideological.
Certainly there’s a political logic here. To begin with, many of the women’s groups that supported him are still smarting over the executive order (banning federal dollars for abortions) he issued to secure passage of his health-care bill. That’s still a sore spot, even though—as his former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, recently told the Chicago Tribune editorial board—that language is not in the law. The presumption being, of course, that eventually the order will be overridden.
The hard line on Planned Parenthood funding also makes sense if the president was calculating that Mr. Boehner would get the blame for a shutdown no matter what. That’s a reasonable assumption, judging from the way the press has swallowed the White House line on who the extremists here are. Never mind that this is the same president who, as an Illinois state senator, famously opposed limiting even partial-birth abortion.
For his part, Mr. Boehner now finds himself criticized for accepting too little in spending cuts and giving up the ship on defunding Planned Parenthood to get a budget deal. Leaving aside his victory in restoring the previous status quo prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortions in the District of Columbia, Mr. Boehner came away with two strong accomplishments.
First, in just three months as speaker, he has managed to change the national debate from “stimulus” and “investment” to “how much spending do we need to cut”—which is why Mr. Obama will be pressing the reset button in a planned speech on spending tomorrow. Second, on Planned Parenthood funding, he has secured something that those concerned about restoring these contentious issues to the people should appreciate: an agreement that the Senate will vote on a separate measure to defund Planned Parenthood.
Surely it tells you something about who the real extremists are that an up or down vote is deemed a concession. In an appearance at a rally before the deal, Mr. Schumer vowed that any bill taking taxpayer dollars from Planned Parenthood would “never, never, never” pass the Senate. In the normal way of doing things, it wouldn’t even have come up for a vote.
"The president was willing to shut down the entire federal government rather than see Planned Parenthood’s federal funding cut."
Or maybe he new Boehner was bluffing?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks Boehner!
The "Culture-of-life" wins the empty symobilsm & Obama keeps the substance & reality. Typically, your GOP win.
The current budget negotiations are the GOP's best hope of separating Obama's extremist social agenda (i.e., defunding Obamacare, Planned Parenthood, NPR, etc,) from the taxpayer's bankrupt dime. Even should the GOP retake the congress & White House in 2012 the Democrats will filibuster any attempt to defund their social engineering government programs & they will be successful. Source the GOP controlled congress & White House 2002-06.
Demonstrably, Obama democrats can think rings around Boehner's GOP.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't think so. I'm wondering if this will remove the fig leaf from the Catholic vote? Probalby not. A lot of 'em don't care.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseArdis, how can keeping funding for stuff that was funded through the entire Bush administration be part of Obama's "extremist social agenda"?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRepublicans have got to find a way to do an end run around the MSM who buy the W.H. line and set the narrative. It is worth money spent by the RNC or whomever to change the conversation. The Democrats are the real extremists here by most reasonable calculations of where the people are today.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMcGurn is right.
If this is what happened, Boehner should have been out in front of the cameras, before the final deadline, denouncing Obama for his extremist position. Why not publicly declare Obama's position as "chilling," if that's what his feeling was, so the entire nation could know it? You have to get this mesage, that Obama is a pro-abortion extremist, out there where the public can hear it. That's how he could really have gotten a culture of life win, by forcing Obama to publicly defend his views, not but getting an single article printed about what happened three days later.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow is keeping things the way they have been for years "extreme?"
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm with Jason. If this had been so extreme why didn't Denny, DeLay, et.al. de-fund Planned Parenthood?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe fact that President Obama went to the mat for Planned Parenthood demonstrates his pro-abortion extremism. Why was federal funding for this nonprofit a priority, while military pay (some of which pays for a war he initiated) was not? The president was willing to de-fund critical services to protect federal funding for Planned Parenthood - which should have been de-funded years ago.
It is President Obama's insistence on federal funding for this organization, ahead of essential services which might actually be considered a proper expense for the federal government, that is especially shocking (but not surprising to anyone who is aware of his record on abortion).
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"The president was willing to de-fund critical services to protect federal funding for Planned Parenthood..."
No, he wasn't.
The Republicans set it up this way, not the President.
Republicans would have been responsible for "de-funding critical services".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusere-Jason
Despite broad support within the Republican Party (when it controlled the White House & congress during the Bush administration) for rescinding the Democrat Party's socialist Federal government agenda i.e., defunding Planned Parenthood, NPR, drilling in Anwar, Social Security reforms, implementing school vouchers, oversight over Fannie & Freddie, etc, their legislation either didn't make it to the floor or was voted down because the Democrat Party filibustered or threatened to do so.
Unless the Republican Party wins the White House and a congressional filibuster proof majority in 2012 that same gridlock scenario will likely be revisted with respect to future GOP political agendas.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo, the Dems are willing to cut billions from other programs to save $363 million (or some similarly piddling amount).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI will certainly vote against any candidate who believes that the Pope's agenda is more important than the US economy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseconigliolo,
A great way for the Republicans to change the conversation is by changing the conversation. Why didn't Boehner hammer away on these points when he was interviewed on Fox News? Why not when he was standing in front of cameras during the negotiations? Don't meekly allow the media to set the narrative. Challenge the narrative at every opportunity.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo, Republicans are to blame for raising the issue. I see.
Actually, Republicans were responding to their constituents - we were asked what were our most important priorities in regard to funding cuts, and de-funding PP was one of the top listed. It continues to be a top priority for most of us.
When one has no money, cutting spending has to begin somewhere. Clearly, the president considers PP spending more important than he does the spending for the military or other essential services.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy now:
1) PP has had 15 years or so of federal money to provide contraception education and the like, which would supposedly lower the rates of teenage pregnancy and abortion. People saw funding these services as the lesser of the evils (the greater being abortion). Where is the statistic that these preventative measures actually work? Has the abortion rate actually gone down?
2) Everything is up to review now that we're neck deep in debt. Especially an organization that can very well raise its own funds.
3) Lila Rose's videos
4) Obama's own extremist position has pushed abortion into the foreground since his election. A very small number of the pop. actually agrees with his "no restrictions ever" policy. Most pro-choicers I know still have limits.
5) With Obamacare around, it's important to set those limits while there is momentum. Because face it, no one knows whats in that thing. Obamacare is really what opened the door.
@panic- Does that also mean you will vote against a politician who puts Cecilia Richards' agenda before the US Economy?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse