Thomas Massie introduces "No Funds for Foreign Abortions Act"

[Occam's Banana]

I was going to post this item to this thread:

Trump just stated he is open to funding planned parenthood... Is this the final straw?

(narrator's aside: "It was not, in fact, the final straw ...")
​

But apparently the thread is locked for archive purposes.

So here it is, followed by the quote to which I was going to post it as a reply:



This would close the "fungibility" loophole (and of course, cutting off all foreign aid would do the same, but ... *shrug* ... you know ... *sigh*):

That is not why it is fungible. "Fungible" does not mean "unaccounted for" or "not earmarked for some particular use." Money is fungible because every unit of it is interchangeable with any other unit of it (regardless of whether some number of units of it can be accounted for in some particular use or not).

For example: When we give Israel $500 million dollars to buy $500 million worth of planes from us, we "free them up" to spend $500 million worth of their own money on other things (such as abortion subsidies). This is money that they would not otherwise have been able to spend without reducing their expenditures elsewhere (such as for planes). It has nothing to with whether every single dollar of the $500 million we gave them can be accounted for or not. If we did not give them that $500 million, then they would have to make a choice - more planes and fewer abortions, or fewer planes and more abortions. But when we give them $500 million (even if it is earmarked only for planes and is fully accounted for), then they don't have to make that choice - they can have more planes and more abortions (because money is fungible).

EDIT: To see how this example applies to Planned Parenthood, just replace "Israel" with "Planned Parenthood," replace "$500 million" with whatever amount of federal funding is given to PP, and replace "planes" with "services other than abortion." Thus, Trump's disclaimer that he does not support federal funding of PP-sponsored abortions - but that he does support federal funding of other PP activities - is essentially contradictory. Because money is fungible, federal funding for the latter (PP-sponsored services other than abortion) is tantamount to federal funding for the former (PP-sponsored abortions).

 

[69360]

How about we just don't give any money to foreign governments?

Planned Parenthood is a tough one. They are the leading provider of contraception which I support and abortion which I don't. If you look at it from a purely monetary standpoint, contraception net saves saves the government money by reducing welfare dependency. But do you want dead babies blood on your hands? I don't have a good answer. It's not like conservatives are going to develop an alternative organization to deliver contraception as the far right christians oppose it.

 

[Occam's Banana]

How about we just don't give any money to foreign governments?

As previously noted:

[...] of course, cutting off all foreign aid would do the same, but ... *shrug* ... you know ... *sigh*

Planned Parenthood is a tough one. They are the leading provider of contraception which I support and abortion which I don't.

As also noted in the thread linked in the OP:

My understanding is that he said he opposes government funding of PP for abortions, but that he supports government funding of PP for other things.

But of course, since money is fungible, funding the latter effectively amounts to funding the former ...

It's not like conservatives are going to develop an alternative organization to deliver contraception as the far right christians oppose it.

Why would "conservatives" or "far right Christians" need to be the ones delivering contraceptives?

Let anyone do it who wants to - as long as they do it with their own money, instead of forcing "conservatives" or "far right Christians" (or anyone else) to pay for it.

 

[69360]

Let anyone do it who wants to - as long as they do it with their own money, instead of forcing "conservatives" or "far right Christians" (or anyone else) to pay for it.

Well if you let liberal groups like PP do it they will want to fund abortions. Christian groups won't do it because they oppose contraception. I think it would make sense to have some sort of NGO that could do it. Yeah, get the government out of it, don't fund anything. But realistically we aren't getting rid of welfare anytime soon, so government funding contraception is a net positive in reducing current spending. Condoms and the pill costs a lot less than feeding a kid for 18 years. So I think some sort of moderate NGO handing it out is the best solution currently.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Well if you let liberal groups like PP do it they will want to fund abortions. [...]

But why is that a problem?

Either abortions should be legal, or they should not be legal.

If you think they should be legal, then the same thing I said about providing contraception goes for providing abortions, too - i.e., allow it, but don't force anyone to pay for it who doesn't want to.

But if you think they should not be legal, then there won't be any need to fund abortions at all, and any "liberal groups" that provided them could be prosecuted and punished for doing so.

 

[Anti Globalist]

Foreign governments can fund abortions using their own money instead of ours.

 

[TheTexan]

We should have a bill that stops all funding to foreign countries that were involved in Epstein

 

[unknown]

How about, end all foreign welfare?

 

[jmdrake]

I was going to post this item to this thread:

​

Trump just stated he is open to funding planned parenthood... Is this the final straw?​

​

(narrator's aside: "It was not, in fact, the final straw ...")​

​

But apparently the thread is locked for archive purposes.

So here it is, followed by the quote to which I was going to post it as a reply:



This would close the "fungibility" loophole (and of course, cutting off all foreign aid would do the same, but ... *shrug* ... you know ... *sigh*):

Hmmm....Israel funds abortions.

Abortion in Israel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So this bill would put Israel First Republicans in a pickle. Vote to effectively block all funding to Israel or vote to allow funding abortions through a "fungibility" argument. Well played Thomas. Well played.

 

[Invisible Man]

How about we just don't give any money to foreign governments?

Planned Parenthood is a tough one. They are the leading provider of contraception which I support and abortion which I don't. If you look at it from a purely monetary standpoint, contraception net saves saves the government money by reducing welfare dependency. But do you want dead babies blood on your hands? I don't have a good answer. It's not like conservatives are going to develop an alternative organization to deliver contraception as the far right christians oppose it.

This bill would go a long way to accomplishing that.

 

[TheTexan]

How about, end all foreign welfare?

Your request has been received and sorted into the appropriate bin