Obama’s HHS: Not Just Pro-Choice, Pro-Abortion and Anti-Pro-Life

By: American Decency Staff

By Chris Johnson There has been a lot of debate, particularly during the Obamacare debacle, about whether or not the government can use taxpayer money to directly or indirectly fund abortion. What has not been debated, is whether the government can NOT fund an organization because the organization does not provide abortions. That is the argument that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) finds itself having now with the Department of Health and Human Services (HSS). In 2006, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) received a grant from HHS' Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to serve the needs of victims of human trafficking. Five years of consecutive grants and one ACLU lawsuit later, ORR has replaced the established and well-run USCCB program with 3 new programs. The Obama Administration's ORR turned down a request from USCCB for $2.5 million and granted a total of about $4.7 million to three other agencies in its place. One of those companies, the biggest benefiter, once employed the head of ORR as its Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. USCCB explains in their blog how they were overlooked for the loan in spite of being more prepared to actually carry out the services. "The ORR’s request for proposals had stated that agencies receiving the money were to be fully operational ten days after being awarded the grant. That would have been October 10. One wonders how that could have happened since USCRI and Heartland reportedly were posting ads seeking to hire staff just a few days before that date. None of the three organizations has much depth of experience in monitoring and providing services… USCCB created an extraordinary program in conjunction with several partners, Christian and secular, including Lutheran Family Services, Jewish Family Services, Salvation Army, YMCA affiliates, domestic violence shelters, World Relief and others. Only one-third of its subcontractors were Catholic-affiliated, but with the USCCB infrastructure they reached virtually everywhere in the USA." All this begs the question – why would HHS replace an established, well-run program asking for less money in favor of 3 programs which have barely hired employees and require a good deal more funding? USCCB believes it all comes down to the right to life. The three organizations which replace the USCCB all provide "services" that Catholics cannot with a clean conscience provide: abortion, sterilization, and artificial contraception. Sister MaryAnn Walsh, a spokesperson for USCCB, told CNSNews.com that HHS declared that they would show "preference" to organizations that did not have the same respect for life that the Catholic organization does. “The contract pointed out that ‘preference’ would be given to those who offer ‘the full-range of legally permissible gynecological and obstetric care,’ which is a codeword for artificial contraception, sterilization and abortion.â€Â HHS' official statement on the decision said the following, "Our focus is always on the needs of victims, and ensuring that they have access to high-quality comprehensive case management services.â€Â HHS apparently does not consider the services to be "comprehensive" enough if they refuse to suggest you kill your baby. That, at least is what the ACLU decided in 2009 when they filed a lawsuit against HHS for allowing  USCCB to not offer abortion, sterilization, or contraceptives. In fact the lawyer arguing for the ACLU said something very similar to the HHS statement in a statement of her own. "Trafficking victims need comprehensive and compassionate care to gain their freedom and lead safe and healthy lives." The ACLU cited – wait for it – the First Amendment. Their complaint was that HHS breached their beloved "wall of separation" (non-existent in the Constitution) "by permitting USCCB to impose a religiously based restriction on the use of taxpayer funds." According to the Catholic News Service, the ACLU suit "asks for a permanent injunction requiring HHS to ensure that funds under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act are disbursed 'without the imposition of religiously based restrictions'" which is exactly what is being implemented. By the way, that suit has not been decided yet. This change is completely voluntary on the part of HHS. As the USCCB blog notes, "The program worked well on the ground. but not so well for distant administrators promoting the abortion and contraceptive agenda, who bristle at the fact that in accord with church teaching, USCCB won’t facilitate taking innocent life, sterilization and artificial contraception. MRS anti-trafficking programs ran successfully for six years in harmony with these moral convictions until the American Civil Liberties Union brought suit against the government for not forcing the USCCB program to provide these services as a part of the program. The suit’s outcome is pending, but ORR apparently has made its own decision apart from any judgment of the court." Sister Walsh told CNSNews.com that USCCB questions the legality of HHS' decision. “First of all, we would question that that is even legal to do that, because there are three amendments – the Church amendment, Coats-Snowe and the Weldon amendment – that all say you can’t do that,â€Â Sister Walsh said. “It violates religious freedom.â€Â The question is will the administration follow the existing laws or will it decide to "legislate its morality," so to speak? ========================================================== Your support is important to our ability to make a difference. Donate online at: https://secure4.afo.net/ada/donate.php American Decency Association is a member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. American Decency Association Bill Johnson, President P.O. Box 202 Fremont, MI 49412 ph: 231-924-4050 www.americandecency.org http://www.twitter.com/billwjohnson

---