quire: do these clinics really deservenfederal funds?nFor starters, the full-page newspapernads and expensive, five-color fundraisingnletter distributed by the chief recipientnof these funds, the Planned ParenthoodnFederation, might tempt thenaverage taxpayer to just say no. Withoutna doubt, tax dollars have freednmillions of private dollars raised by thisnspecial interest group (using its taxdeductiblenstatus, another subsidy) fornslick marketing campaigns to lobbynCongress and the public. But furtherninvestigation reveals the real reasonnthese groups call the Court’s decisionnthe “gag rule”: they gagged when theynrealized how many millions of dollarsnthey would lose if the ruling were notnoverturned.nPlanned Parenthood, which led thencharge against the decision, is the preeminentnexample. In 1987, PlannednParenthood’s annual report revealednthat its affiliates’ income was $249.5nmillion, of which $111.2 million wasnfurnished by federal, state, and localngovernment reimbursements. Currently,n$37 million annually goes to thesenaffiliates from Title X, and due to thenway federal block grants are administered.nPlanned Parenthood has beennable to obtain hundreds of millionsnthrough 19 different appropriationsnmeasures, including Medicaid, TitlenV, Title XIX, and Title XX.nThe organization and its affiliatesnoperate the nation’s largest chain ofnabortion facilities. In the early 1980’s,nthe U.S. General Accounting Officenreported that Planned Parenthood clinicsnhad a 50 percent higher abortionreferralnrate than other, similar clinics.nThe Federahon’s 1989 Service Reportnreveals that this chain performed overn111,000 abortions in 1988 and madenreferrals for 100,000 more. Thosennumbers had significantly escalated innthe 1980’s: from 1977 through 1986,nthe number of affiliates doing abortionsnincreased by 68 percent, and the numbernof abortions performed increasednby 85 percent. Some affiliates alsonperform more expensive, later-termnabortions. Based on its published abortionndata and other statistics collectednby survey. Planned Parenthood affiliatesnreceived approximately $21.1 millionnin income from performing abortionsnalone in 1986. Using currentnfigures, that abortion income is nowneshmated at around $30 million annually.n-One-third of Title X clients arenadolescents. Planned Parenthood affili-,nates routinely dispense contraceptivendevices, abortion referrals, and, in mostnstates, perform abortions without parentalnconsent or even knowledge. Nationwide,nPlanned Parenthood has angrilynlobbied against efforts to requirenparental notice before abortions arenperformed on underage clients. Whennthe U.S. Senate recently passed a popularnamendment calling for parentalnnotification for minors in the ChafeenTitle X funding measure. Planned Parenthoodncalled it “heinous” andnsought its repeal.nThere is evidence that the “poor”nthe organization claims to assist includena large number of young, non-poorngirls who are financially supported byntheir parents. Information obtainednfrom clients and clinic records revealsnthat there are instances where counselorsnhave declared these younger girlsn”indigent” based on the fact that theynhave no sizable income of their own.nThus, taxpayers also foot the bill fornthese “indigent” clients through TitlenXX. For example, Planned Parenthoodnclaims that it helps four million “poor”nwomen annually. However, using figuresngathered from a report by its AlannCuttmacher Institute, in 1983 only 13npercent of all family planning clinicsnwere welfare recipients.nThere is other evidence that cashpayingnclients pay one rate for pregnancyntests, contraceptive services, ornfamily planning counseling, whilengovernment-subsidized clients paynhigher rates — at taxpayer expense. Althoughneach affiliate sets its own billingnschedules, clinic records obtained fromna Texas affiliate by demographer RobertnH. Ruff reveal that cash-payingnpatients paid 32 dollars for an initialnbirth control visit, while governmentsubsidizednclients paid 77 dollars; ancash-paid pregnancy test cost 16 dollars,nwhile the government-paid pregnancyntest cost 57 dollars; cash clientsnpaid 40 dollars for an annual birthncontrol check-up, but governmentsubsidizednclients paid 85 dollars.nWhen the government pays, the “services”nare two to four times more expensive.nAre “family planning” clinics effectivenin preventing pregnancies andnnnabortions, as Planned Parenthood hasnclaimed? In a significant study of familynplanning clients reported in the WallnStreet Journal, Dr. Stan Weed summarizednthese findings: “As the numbernand proportion of teenage family planningnclients increased, we observed ancorresponding increase in the teenagenpregnancy and abortion rates: 50 ton120 more pregnancies per thousandnclients, rather than the 200 to 300nfewer pregnancies as estimated bynresearchers. . . . We did find thatngreater teenage participation in suchnclinics led to lower teen birthrates.nHowever, the impact on the abortionnand pregnancy rates was exactly oppositenthe stated intention of the program.nThe original problems appear tonhave grown worse.”nWhenever clients undergo abortions,nthey also routinely receive contraceptionnand family planning counseling.nHowever, Planned Parenthood’snown data (in Family PlanningnPerspectives) reveals that fully 43 percentnof all abortions are repeat abortions.nThe Center for Disease Controlnreports that one out of seven womennundergoing abortions acknowledgenhaving two or more previous abortionsn— for another 5.7 percent of all abortions.nA failure rate of nearly 50 percentnis grounds for rethinking anynpublic policy.nFinally, an important footnote aboutnthe disingenuous claim of “gagging”ndoctors. In these family planning clinics,nunlike private practices, the clientsnare advised by “counselors,” who arensometimes volunteers, and not doctors.nThe distinctive feature of such clinics isnthat they are designed like assemblynlines to handle high volume, and mostnclients never even see the doctor untilnthey are on the surgical table. Yet thesendoctors make huge profits, and some ofnthem admit that they left obstetricsnbecause abortion was considerablynmore profitable and less trouble.nIf defense contractors are to benaccountable, then so should domesticn”contractors.” If Congress is going tonspend scarce revenues for domesticnprograms, then the public wants thenmoney to go to the truly needy, and fornprograms that work. And concerningntax funds for clinics, the average multiissuentaxpayer would agree: PlannednParenthood’s lucrative operations arenno more “entitied” to scarce federalnNOVEMBER 1991/7n