Reading Time: 3 minutes
In response to Texas' ongoing efforts to avoid subsidizing abortion providers, the federal government recently bypassed the state's Medicaid-based women's health program and granted Title X money directly to the Women's Health and Family Planning Association of Texas. This group includes Planned Parenthood clinics.
So, it's a workaround; and probably a workaround orchestrated by Planned Parenthood and the pro-abortion Obama Health and Human Services Department. No news there.
However, two assertions in the Houston Chronicle article reporting the grant provide a teaching moment. These assertions are apparently contradictory but technically true in an Enronish sort of way. Fran Hagerty, CEO of the group, claims both that:
[O]nly two of the 34 clinics in her association are affiliated with Planned Parenthood.
None of the 34 clinics that will get the grant money provide abortions.
Huh. How is it that Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, will receive money; while at the same time, no clinic receiving money provides abortions? The answer lies in the concept of “legal separation” and Ms. Hagerty's unusually legalistic use of the word “clinic.” Here's how it works.
Planned Parenthood has long asserted that its contraception business (plan A) is “legally separated” from its abortion business (plan B). See Planned Parenthood's 2012 Texas lawsuit for more.
According to the narrative, because Planned Parenthood's contraception business is conducted through “legally and financially separate affiliates,” that business has nothing to do with the abortion business.
Since this assertion rests on purported separation, let's take a look. In the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood claims that Planned Parenthood of Austin, Hidalgo County, Lubbock, San Antonio and the Gulf Coast (among others, the “Plaintiffs”) are “separated.”
Consider a few tests of separateness – physical connection, joint versus separate marketing/brand, connection of activities and, finally, financial linkage.
First, is there any physical or locational difference between the Plaintiffs and the abortion business? One of the Plaintiffs, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, is located at 4600 Gulf Freeway, Houston, Texas 77023. Houston-area Planned Parenthood performs its abortions through Planned Parenthood Center for Choice Ambulatory Surgical Center, a “separate” entity which is also located at 4600 Gulf Freeway, Houston, TX 77023. The two differently-named entities are in the same building and share the same signage and parking lot, enabling combined operations.
Second, consider marketing. Are the Plaintiffs and the abortion business marketed differently? Nope. All use the registered service mark 'Planned Parenthood.”
Third, is there any connection between the Plaintiffs' activities and abortion? Yes. Planned Parenthood contraception distribution and its abortions are highly correlated, at 87% positive correlation. This should surprise no one – lots of contraception means lots of sex. Contraception fails in predictable percentages, meaning more unintended pregnancies and more abortions. Study after study demonstrate this. The Plaintiffs' activities (plan A) and the abortion business (plan B) fit together very well.
Finally, is there any connection between the Plaintiffs' receipt of public funds and abortion? Yes. Planned Parenthood's own data shows that, not only is there a connection, there is a 99% positive correlation between its receipt of funds and the number of abortions it commits. Planned Parenthood's abortion business is highly linked to its public funding. They are statistically one and the same.
So the Plaintiffs and Planned Parenthood's aborting entities co-locate, market under the same brand and have significantly intertwined and co-dependent activities. Additionally, the Planned Parenthood abortion business reaps a direct and near-perfectly correlated benefit from the Plaintiffs' receipt of public funds.
We have our answer. Although there is no substance to being a “legally and financially separate” Planned Parenthood affiliate, Ms. Hagerty relied on the concept to describe her group. “Legal and financial separation” is smoke and mirrors crafted specifically for Planned Parenthood to receive Title X funds, for workarounds like the Women's Health and Family Planning Association and to provide cover for articles like the Houston Chronicle story.
“Legal and financial separation” joins other pro-abortion nonsense, including that Planned Parenthood provides mammograms, abortions are only 3% of Planned Parenthood's business, Title X has nothing to do with abortion and contraception reduces unintended pregnancies. The consistency of pro-choice logic remains intact.
Keith Riler is a financial analyst who has written for FirstThings.com, Faith magazine, Texas Right to Life, and LifeNews.
This post originally appeared at AmericanThinker.com and is reprinted with permission.