JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House voted Wednesday to ban state funding of contraceptives for low-income women and to prohibit state-funded programs from referring those women to other programs.
Critics jumped on the proposal, saying it would lead to more abortions and more unwanted children on welfare.
But the proposal’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Susan Phillips of Kansas City, said contraceptive services were an inappropriate use of tax dollars. “If doctors want to give contraception privately or personally, they can,” Phillips said. “But we don’t need to pay for contraception with taxpayer funds.”
Further:
Phillips’ amendment did not save the state money. Instead, it imposed restrictions on how state agencies could spend $9.23 million earmarked for public-health programs, mainly for people who are poor but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.
And, it gets worse:
The Budget Committee had approved expenditures on screenings for breast and cervical cancer, sexually transmitted diseases, infertility treatments and contraception.
Phillips’ amendment eliminated infertility treatments and contraception, and substituted alternatives to abortion and prenatal care for the purpose of giving birth. It also prohibited spending on any treatment and referrals for any treatment not spelled out in the budget.
Missouri now joins the growing list of red states passing laws to restrict women's rights. And what about low-income men? Do they still get state-funded contraception in Missouri?
Phillips said she proposed these cuts because groups like Missouri Right to Life and the Missouri Catholic Conference supported it. No surprise there, but I want to know if these groups will support the children who will be born due to this lack of contraception. Of course they won't. What was I thinking?
No comments:
Post a Comment