Why Fox News Might Go to War Against Tucker Carlson
Wait, the FBI's Informant Spoke to the Person Who Allegedly Bribed Biden?
If Trump Is Indicted in the Classified Doc Probe, We Know the Location...
Hunter Biden's Child Support Case Could Get a Lot More Interesting Soon
CNN Drama Intensifies, Everyone But the Audience Hates Tucker’s Show, and the Press...
Conservatives Stunned Over Arrest of Man Peacefully Protesting Pride Event
Dem Squad Member Makes Ridiculous Claim About 'Anti-Woke' Republicans
NYC Unveils Drug-Themed Vending Machines Supplied With Crack Pipes and Narcan
Utah Rep. Chris Stewart Officially Announces Resignation From Congress
CNN Reporter Gives Brutal Assessment of Ousted CEO Chris Licht
Newsom Threatens DeSantis Once Again As Florida Continues to Thrive and California Suffers
Will the Biden Administration Pull Embattled Labor Nominee?
Move Over Ladies, Miss California Is A Man This Year
Texas Becomes the Latest State to Protect Kids From Irreversible Trans Surgeries
Another Dem Governor Signs Sweeping Gun Control Restrictions into Law

Planned Parenthood's Lawless Bloodlust in NH

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

In a growing number of states around the country, legislators and other office holders are doing their best to stem the flow of taxpayer monies into Planned Parenthood’s coffers. And as they do this, it’s understood that they’re one judge away from having their legislation crippled or thrown out, and the financial lifeline to Planned Parenthood reopened.

But now we see it’s not just an activist federal judge that might eviscerate these efforts; the Obama Administration may simply fund Planned Parenthood in direct opposition to the decisions of state legislators and office holders.

For example, in June 2011, the Executive Council of the State of New Hampshire, which operates as a kind of three-headed lieutenant governor and is charged with approving state contracts, acted to prevent taxpayer dollars from subsidizing the operational costs of abortions by voting not to provide a $1.8 million grant to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.

The Executive Council held public sessions from which it concluded that the award of such a grant to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England would be tantamount to subsidizing abortion operations.

The council acted in the belief that its decision was consistent with the values and needs of New Hampshire’s citizens. They determined that state and federal taxpayer dollars should be directed toward and used for the needs of the people of New Hampshire rather than on subsidizing a multi-million-dollar abortion company.

But on Sept. 13, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced it was replacing the funds denied by the state by approving a grant of $1.1 million to go directly to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England.

This is antithetical to the desires of the voters in New Hampshire who expressed their wishes by putting individuals on the Executive Council who would vote in way consistent with their values. This move effectively tells the voters in New Hampshire that they have no say in how certain decisions are made in that state.

The grant from HHS is also troubling because it came on the heels of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England racking up huge cash surpluses during recent years: $21,773,569 in 2009 and $5,626,756 in 2010.

With those kinds of “profits” already on the books, why are tax payers continuing to subsidize the abortion provider?

The bottom line: New Hampshire’s Executive Council said “no,” but the Obama administration gave over a million new dollars to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England anyway.

The federal government has no business flouting the law to fund the bloodlust of Planned Parenthood in clear contradiction to the wishes of the people of New Hampshire.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video