Politics & Policy

Defunding Planned Parenthood: Donald Trump’s Good Start

Sign at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Boston, Mass. (Dominick Reuter)

Thursday evening the Trump administration announced a measure that pro-life advocates have been seeking since the Clinton administration — restoration of  Reagan-era rules that “require a ‘bright line’ of physical and financial separation between Title X services and providers that perform, support, or refer to abortion as a method of family planning.” To understand Title X, and its role in the abortion debate, requires a bit of background.

Planned Parenthood — America’s largest abortion provider — receives more than $450 million annually in federal funding, a significant portion of its annual revenue. Most of that money (roughly 85 percent) comes through Medicaid disbursements. The Trump administration cannot strip those funds from Planned Parenthood without passing legislation — and that legislation would certainly be filibustered by Democrats.

The rest of the federal money comes through Title X of the Public Health Service Act, a federal program that funds “family planning” services and authorizes the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “make grants to and enter into contracts with public or non-profit private entities to assist in the establishment and operation of voluntary family planning projects which shall offer a broad range of acceptable and effective family planning methods and services.” At the same time, however, the enabling statute is crystal clear that “none of the funds appropriated under this subchapter shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.”

In other words, the goal was to support “preventative family planning services” — contraception, for example — and abortion services are not “preventative.” While the purpose of the statute has long been clear, Democratic presidents have resisted proper enforcement and have allowed abortion-providing organizations such as Planned Parenthood ready access to Title X funds with minimal (and minimally effective) restrictions. In 1988, however, the Reagan administration provided the proper model for enforcement by promulgating regulations that attached three main conditions to the receipt of Title X funds.

First, a Title X project could not “provide counseling concerning the use of abortion as a method of family-planning or provide referral for abortion as a method of family planning.” Second, a project could not “encourage, promote or advocate abortion as a method of family planning.” (The first two restrictions were known, collectively, as the “gag rule.”) Finally, a project had to be “physically and financially separate” from facilities that provide abortions. “Mere bookkeeping separation” was not sufficient.

A coalition of Title X grantees and doctors challenged the Reagan rules in court, and in 1991 the Supreme Court upheld the regulations in their entirety. Unfortunately, however, the Clinton administration promptly repealed the regulations, and they have not been reinstated since.

The Trump administration’s announced rule represents in effect a partial reinstatement of the Reagan-era restrictions and a move towards compliance with statute. Trump’s rules do not prohibit Title X projects from offering abortion counseling. In other words, they don’t reinstate the “gag rule,” but they do require physical and financial separation of Title X and abortion services — a requirement that many Planned Parenthood facilities simply can’t (or don’t want to) meet.

While the new regulations ideally would have included Reagan’s restrictions on abortion counseling, the Trump administration has made a positive and necessary step not just towards the unambiguously pro-life goal of defunding the nation’s largest abortion provider but also towards carrying out the intent of Congress when it passed Title X. As Chief Justice Rehnquist noted in the majority opinion in Rust v. Sullivan — the case upholding Reagan’s regulations — “If one thing is clear from the legislative history, it is that Congress intended that Title X funds be kept separate and distinct from abortion-related activities.” Requiring a bright line of physical and financial separation accomplishes this intent.

If Planned Parenthood is unwilling or unable to comply with Trump’s regulations, women have ample alternative options to receive birth control or preventative care. In fact, as the administration argued in its own informational materials, “non-abortion centers” outnumber Planned Parenthood abortion centers “by more than 20 to 1 nationwide.”

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rust and the more limited reach of Trump’s policy, expect Trump’s regulations to be immediately challenged in federal court. Abortion-rights activists will almost certainly file suit in a favorable jurisdiction and hope to secure preliminary injunctions with the goal of running out the regulatory clock — of delaying the regulations until a Democrat can take back the White House. As multiple court rulings have already demonstrated, progressive federal judges have shown no hesitation to defy controlling precedent and join the judicial branch of the #Resistance.

Thus, it’s a simple fact that the administration’s announcement yesterday is but the first step in a long journey — the beginning of yet another regulatory, legal, and political fight where the outcome is far from certain. But Republicans must not shy away from this battle, and the Trump administration is right to more effectively enforce the will of Congress. We applaud this decision.

The Editors comprise the senior editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

Most Popular

Culture

What We’ve Learned about Jussie Smollett

It’s been a few weeks since March 26, when all charges against Jussie Smollett were dropped and the actor declared that his version of events had been proven correct. How’s that going? Smollett’s celebrity defenders have gone quiet. His publicists and lawyers are dodging reporters. The @StandwithJussie ... Read More
Elections

Kamala Harris Runs for Queen

I’m going to let you in on a secret about the 2020 presidential contest: Unless unforeseen circumstances lead to a true wave election, the legislative stakes will be extremely low. The odds are heavily stacked against Democrats’ retaking the Senate, and that means that even if a Democrat wins the White House, ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Lessons of the Mueller Probe

Editor’s Note: The following is the written testimony submitted by Mr. McCarthy in connection with a hearing earlier today before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on the Mueller Report (specifically, the first volume of the report, which addresses Russia’s interference in the 2016 ... Read More
World

Why Are the Western Middle Classes So Angry?

What is going on with the unending Brexit drama, the aftershocks of Donald Trump’s election, and the “yellow vests” protests in France? What drives the growing estrangement of southern and eastern Europe from the European Union establishment? What fuels the anti-EU themes of recent European elections and ... Read More
Energy & Environment

The Climate Trap for Democrats

The more the climate debate changes, the more it stays the same. Polls show that the public is worried about climate change, but that doesn’t mean that it is any more ready to bear any burden or pay any price to combat it. If President Donald Trump claws his way to victory again in Pennsylvania and the ... Read More
White House

Sarah Sanders to Resign at End of June

Sarah Huckabee Sanders will resign from her position as White House press secretary at the end of the month, President Trump announced on Twitter Thursday afternoon. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1139263782142787585 Sanders, the daughter of former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, succeeded Sean ... Read More
Politics & Policy

But Why Is Guatemala Hungry?

I really, really don’t want to be on the “Nicolas Kristof Wrote Something Dumb” beat, but, Jiminy Cricket! Kristof has taken a trip to Guatemala, with a young woman from Arizona State University in tow. “My annual win-a-trip journey,” he writes. Reporting from Guatemala, he discovers that many ... Read More