Skip to content
Donate Now
  • Donate Now
  • logo
  • logo
  • News
  • Fundraising
    • Fundraising
    • Crowdfunding
    • Development
    • Donor Retention
  • Philanthropy
    • Philanthropy
    • Foundations
    • Grantmaking
    • Online Giving
  • Management
    • Management
    • Board Governance
    • Finance
    • Leadership
    • Technology
  • Policy
    • Policy
    • Activism
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Government
    • Healthcare
    • Taxes
  • Webinars
    • Premium Webinars
  • Magazine
  • Opinion
    • Editor’s Notes
    • The Cohen Report
    • Dr. Conflict
    • The Nonprofit Ethicist
    • Unraveling Development
    • Voices from the Field
  • Store
  • Donate Now

  • Subscribe
  • Member Log in
  • Manage Subscription
Link to subscription form
  • News
  • Fundraising
    • Fundraising
    • Crowdfunding
    • Development
    • Donor Retention
  • Philanthropy
    • Philanthropy
    • Foundations
    • Grantmaking
    • Online Giving
  • Management
    • Management
    • Board Governance
    • Finance
    • Leadership
    • Technology
  • Policy
    • Policy
    • Activism
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Government
    • Healthcare
    • Taxes
  • Webinars
    • Premium Webinars
  • Magazine
  • Opinion
    • Editor’s Notes
    • The Cohen Report
    • Dr. Conflict
    • The Nonprofit Ethicist
    • Unraveling Development
    • Voices from the Field
  • Store
  • My Menu

Trump Deal to Planned Parenthood: Stop Offering Abortion Services and Keep Federal Funding

By Sheela Nimishakavi | March 8, 2017
Share61
Tweet
Email
Share6
67 Shares

“Planned Parenthood in St. Paul” By Fibonacci Blue (Flickr: Planned Parenthood in St. Paul) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

March 7, 2017; ABC News

In a not-so-subtle political play, President Trump offered a deal to Planned Parenthood on Monday, following the release of details of the ACA replacement proposal that would defund the organization if it passed. The deal was, if Planned Parenthood would stop performing abortion services, the nonprofit could maintain its federal funding.

It is important to note that due to the Hyde Amendment, no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions. Republicans argue that federal funds going to Planned Parenthood for other services, such as cancer screenings, birth control, sexually transmitted disease screenings, and more, free up the clinic’s unrestricted dollars to be used for abortions. However, the clinic indicates that patients—or, if they have a policy that allows it, private insurance—pay for abortion procedures. Thus, federal funds do not even get used for abortion services indirectly.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, says, “It’s important to understand that Planned Parenthood works like every hospital, every health care provider in this country. We get reimbursed for preventative health care, period, end of story.”

What it really means to “defund” Planned Parenthood is that Medicaid would prevent its patients from going to Planned Parenthood (or, technically, any other organization receiving more than $350 million in Medicaid funding, should there be one), blocking women, and low-income women in particular, from access to reproductive health care. According to the Government Accountability Office, if Planned Parenthood is indeed defunded, 390,000 women would have no access to preventative care and access would be reduced for 650,000 within one year.

Given these numbers, President Trump’s political agenda becomes clear. Trump does not want to be the bad guy who denies millions of patients access to life-saving reproductive healthcare. At the same time, he does not want to lose favor among his own party by standing up for Planned Parenthood, although he has indicated on multiple occasions that he recognizes the work they do is important. By proposing the idea to Planned Parenthood, Trump passes blame from his administration to Planned Parenthood, since they attempted to be reasonable but Planned Parenthood rejected their generous offer.

What President Trump may fail to realize is that his offer calls on Planned Parenthood to change its mission and core values. In the nonprofit world, this is known as “mission drift,” wherein organizations change their mission to chase funding, and it is incontestably frowned upon. Planned Parenthood essentially had no choice but to reject the proposal, so the president’s deal was not truly a good-faith effort to help the clinic and its patients.

In a statement regarding the matter, Richards indicated that Planned Parenthood would not back down and would continue its commitment to providing the full scope of women’s health services. Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood, offered a passionate response to Trump’s proposal that echoed Richard’s statement: “Offering money to Planned Parenthood to abandon our patients and our values is not a deal that we will ever accept. Providing critical health care services for millions of American women is non-negotiable.”— Sheela Nimishakavi

Share61
Tweet
Email
Share6
67 Shares

About Sheela Nimishakavi

Sheela Nimishakavi is a nonprofit finance and operations professional with a passion for creating socially just and inclusive communities. She has held senior management positions at several community based organizations addressing access to healthcare and services for persons with disabilities, currently serving as the Director of Operations of the Brain Injury Association of Virginia. After working in the nonprofit field for over a decade and seeing many organizations struggle with the administrative requirements of running a nonprofit, Sheela founded ThirdSuite, a consulting firm that offers nonprofit administrative services and trainings to help organizations increase their capacity and further their mission. Sheela received an MA/MPH in Health Policy and Management from Boston University School of Public Health, and a BS in Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior from the University of California, Davis. She currently serves on the boards of the Central Virginia Grant Professionals Association and Empowering People for Inclusive Communities.

  • More by Sheela

Read Next

  • Proposed Federal Rule Endangers Legally Admitted Immigrants

    Even as chaos erupts on the border with Mexico and armed forces try to keep asylum seekers from entering the United States, immigrants already legally admitted also face assault. A proposed amended “public charge” rule would make accepting standard supports like Medicaid health insurance grounds for not getting a green card.

Popular Posts

  • The 2019 Gates Letter: What Surprises Them Scares Us
  • Mission Haiku: the Poetry of Mission Statements
  • Green New Deal Bill Introduced in Congress
  • Scaling Social Justice: A Latinx Immigrant Worker Co-op Franchise Model
  • Special Message: The Risk to Democracy in Trump’s National Emergency
  • Bennett College Back from the Brink: The Value of Solidarity

Write for NPQ

  • Our Mission
  • Advertise
  • Board of Directors
  • Foundations and Funders
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • NPQ Staff
  • Contact Us
  • Press Release
  • Donors
  • Newsletters
  • Copyright Policy
  • Privacy Policy

  • Copyright Policy
  • Privacy Policy

Back to top ↑

To Access the Full Article, Please Login or Subscribe

Can't Login?

Register a New Account Forgot Password

Continue Reading