As your state representatives, we stay current on policy issues all over our country. One of the most troubling is the attack on Planned Parenthood. Some in our state and national government want to prohibit them from providing health care in our community and stop us from being able to choose our own health care provider. It is apparent there is a lack of knowledge and information about this important health care provider.
Planned Parenthood has been an essential provider in Arizona for over 75 years, serving 64,600 patients per year in the greater Phoenix area with life-saving cancer screenings, prevention and treatment of STDs, birth control and emergency contraception, sexuality education and more. These critical services account for more than 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood provides to men, women and families in our community.
In these tough economic times, Arizonans deserve access to affordable health care with the provider they choose. Preventive care is the key to keeping people healthy to enable them to support their families. This nonprofit provider puts all its revenue back into the services provided right here in Arizona. A majority of patients pay very little or nothing for these critical services, with Planned Parenthood only being reimbursed for a percentage of the actual cost for the services. And, in many cases, Planned Parenthood may be a woman's primary care provider, in fact, her only health care provider.
Access to Planned Parenthood's preventive services do just that - prevent disease and unplanned pregnancy. The cost of which is much higher than providing care, which ultimately saves lives and money. Through federal programs for those who qualify, Planned Parenthood provides essential prevention services to tens of thousands of patients every year.
The most important factor in this policy debate is that politicians should not be choosing your health care provider, you should. As state legislators, we choose Planned Parenthood and will fight to make sure you get to choose your health care provider, not the Legislature.
Ben Arredondo and Ed Ableser
Arizona State Representatives (District 17)
Rich posted at 2:34 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
"Through federal programs for those who qualify, Planned Parenthood provides essential prevention services to tens of thousands of patients every year."
And this costs how much? Do you guys just around and think of ways to spend our money and money we don't have yet? Tens of thousands of freebies? This is what you got elected to do? Hey, we're broke and getting broker. Please stop spending what we don't have in the first place.
samkat posted at 2:52 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
The costs are probably a lot less than if women have babies they do not need and do not want. A pack of birth control pills is far less than monthly CPS payments to take care of an unwanted child.
One of my pet peeves with our far right conservatives is sucking off badly needed education funds to be diverted to charter schools.
Rich posted at 3:09 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
"A pack of birth control pills is far less than monthly CPS payments to take care of an unwanted child.." So get rid of CPS. About once a week there's a story in the paper about some child who died because they fell down on the job. It won't get any worse if they just go away.
Public education is really just indoctrination, teaching children to be good little sheeple. With charter schools you at least know what they are being indoctrinated in. Remember kiddies, it's a two party system, be sure to vote when you're old enough.
thinkbeforeyouspendothersmoney posted at 4:09 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
How is it that politicians only tell you what they want you to hear. BOTH AUTHORS BLATANTLY LEFT OUT THEIR SUPPORT AND PERFORMANCE OF ABORTIONS IN THESE PLANNED PARENTHOOD FACILITIES. F.Y.I. : Since the new abortion education AZ law was written and enforced it is an amazing how many abortions are NOT being carried out. Knowledge is power. tell the facts- all of them .
I'll sort out what I choose to support rather than you spending my tax dollars on "hobby projects".
onerebel posted at 5:38 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
I have no problem with them providing health care, it's when they use my tax dollars to provide abortions. To put it in terms the left can understand, it would be like making P.E.T.A pay for the clubs to kill baby seals !
MrsKinAJ posted at 7:05 pm on Sun, Dec 4, 2011.
Why can't people pay for their own birth control? Why do taxpayers have to pick up the tab for some stranger's birth control pills?
Abstract01 posted at 12:31 am on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
Who is "attacking” Planned Parenthood? My guess is that these two democrats have labeled the legislators that are trying to reduce government spending as the attackers. There is no attack, but a careful consideration of how my tax dollars should be used. Mr. Arredondo still has all the bluster that he used as a student coach at a local high school.
Planned Parenthood is a healthcare provider? Since when? The only "patients" they have are women who have become pregnant, and do not want the inconvenience. The only planning this "non-profit" organization seem to do is how to get the taxpayer to foot the bill.
It is not much of a non-profit-- the counselors make money, the abortion doctors and clinics make money. What non-profit means is that they gobbled up all the tax dollars and donations because there are no stockholders to receive dividends.
The bogeyman here is "if you defund Planned Parenthood, and it goes away, nobody will help these poor inexperienced mothers-to-be. That is a load of crock! There are various counseling services and not-for-profit adoptive organizations.
The reason that government-dependent people object is because most of these services would require the "patient" to accept responsibility for their actions.
Nine months of this "responsibility", with no economic or emotional reward afterward may be a very strong deterrent to repetitive behaviors for women.
The matter that needs attention, is how to exact a similar responsibility and economic burden on the male partner? Should that not be a focus of attention for those who want to protect the "defenseless" woman who bears such burdens?
Suelee posted at 4:42 am on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
"Stop attacks on Planned Parenthood?" Just as soon as Planned Parenthood stops their attacks on pre-born children. Their agenda to "decrease the surplus population" (Ebeneezer Scrooge) cannot be considered "health care" as alleged by the authors since it obviously does not care about the health of the next generation of children.
As far as any other non-abortion services, women would be better served by seeing a primary care doctor or gynecologist, so that all of their health care issues can be addressed. If the cost of services is an issue, then funds that would have gone to Planned Parenthood should be reallocated to the primary care providers that treat the whole woman, not just her uterus.
Dale Whiting posted at 9:19 am on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
Perhaps as some of the above critical commenters assert, one can reasonably oppose Planned Parenthood as a welfare program for poor, even indigent women. But where PP has seperated its funding in ways which prevent government funding from paying for abortions, the objection based on government funding is without merit.
So let's get the facts and debate the correct issue, not the old collateral and misinformed issue.
Accuracy posted at 12:03 pm on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
Stop lawsuit attacks by Planned Parenthood challenging abortion restrictions.
In October, legislation went into effect that allows medical personnel to refrain from taking part in abortions on moral or religious grounds. It also requires that a medical doctor perform all surgical abortions and that minors get notarized parental consent for abortions. There is also a mandatory 24-hour waiting period and information must be delivered in person.
Due to these recent Arizona restrictions, Planned Parenthood Arizona (PPAZ) clinics in Arizona are no longer able to administer abortions.
Despite a Planned Parenthood Arizona lawsuit challenging a 2009 state law restricting abortion services that has been dismissed by the Court of Appeals ruling, Planned Parenthood still has a lawsuit pending that challenges 2011 abortion restrictions that include a prohibition against non-physicians performing medication abortions.
VofReason posted at 2:54 pm on Mon, Dec 5, 2011.
If Planned Parenthood seperated the abortion services from their preventative care, there would be no argument. Most people realize that providing preventative care is both cost effective and the right thing to do. Most people also realize that the shear number of abortions that Planned Parenthood provides compromises the philosiphy that they can provide preventative care and abortions seperately and distinctly.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:54 am on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
VofReason,
As I recall, 5% of PP's budget is for abortions, 95% is for healthcare, most screenings, and alike. And they keep these Dollars seperate. No Government subsidied funds creap from the subsidized section of their operations to the non-subsidized side doing abortions. So what's your beef, fella? If you don't trust them, then lets you and I audit them!
Leon Ceniceros posted at 10:09 am on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
Wow....things must "REALLY"...be bad for Arizona Democrat Legislators when they won't even identify themseleves as ...."DEMOCRATS"....in their "Letter to the Editor".
Now I can see where Rep. Ben Arredondo might have some "qualms" about labeling himself because of his "HUGE" involvement with the ..."Fiesta Bowl Scandal".
That was the "supposed" reason that Randy Parraz and the Democrats and the Mormons went after Russell Pearce ...."wasn't it" ????
Ben Arredondo was right at the "top of the heap" of all of the "freebie Hotel/Resort stays, the tickets to Super Bowl Games and other major footbal games all over the Country". He even took the ......."5th Amendment"...when questioned....which was his "right" of course. Now Ben Arredondo did go back and "revise" his AZ Legislature Financial Disclosure Forms for the years...2007....2008...2009...to reflect the 10's of 1000's of Dollar$ in ......"gifts".
As for AZ "Democrat" Legislator Ed Ableser...other than being a California-transplant...and an Obama..."Dream Act" supporter (you know....the one about giving..."Mexican Illegal Alien"...students who have cost the AZ tax-payer = $7,670.00 for 12 years..............ARIZONA IN-STATE....tuition fees instead of ...Out of State/Foreign National Tuition fees (rewarding them for entering the United States = Illegally)..............he doesn't have the ..."Fiesta Bowl Scandal" baggage hanging around his neck that......others do.
Why do I bring these facts to light...because when Arizona Politicians write a "Letter to the Editor"...and don't feel that it is necessary to give the reader all the pertinent facts of who they are and why they are writing this letter..hiding their Political Affilitations....(which would certainly affect their underlying.........."AGENDA"....just like many of the members of the Valley of the Sun...journalism group).....these ...dots need to be connected..to get the whole picture.
Not just the "snapshot" that the writers want the public to see.
Bottom line = Planned Parenthood does some wonderful things with their program but they also do things that are abhorent to many of us.
If Planned Parenthood wants to receive ....taxpayer funds then the tax-payer has a voice in where his/her hard-earned taxes should go...and "ABORTION" ..isn't one of these places.
VofReason posted at 1:16 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
Dale has quite a bit of trust in an organization that murders babies and a government that squanders money with little accountability. How about this, unless they completely disassociate the two clinics, not another dime of taxpayer money should go to them. If things are so clean and tidy and hard lines drawn between them, there should be no problem. Think that is going to happen?
sdjtaz posted at 3:57 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
Facts:
1. Rowe v. Wade is still the law of the land. Most of the arguments against Planned Parenthood that I see here is based upon a conservative religion, which teaches that life begins at conception. You are welcome to have these religious beliefs, but you do not have the right to impose them upon others.
2. Approximately 7% of what Planned Parenthood does is based on abortion services. The other 93% goes towards medical care and pregnancy prevention.
3. The same religious beliefs that teaches that life begins at conception often teaches that any form of birth control is wrong. After all, only God can determine when to have a child.
4. The reason that Planned Parenthood spends so much time on pregnancy prevention is that it is far more effective in preventing abortions than anything else.
5. By federal law, NO federal funds provided to Planned Parenthood goes to abortion services. It is used for health care and abortion prevention.
6. In the United States, no one is forced to have an abortion (to do so would be against everything that being pro-choice is about). Additionally, no one is forced to provide funds for an abortion. So realistically, the argument isn't about government, but about the pro-life's need to dictate their religion onto others.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 6:01 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
Folks............one thing you might have picked up on is that this AZ Legislators (I guess they wanted to keep the fact that they were "DEMOCRATS'...as a dirty little secret....[wink]) and that...........Planned Parenthood has performed ...2,750,000 ....TWO MILLION, SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND....."ABORTIONS".......since 1997.
To put...........2,750,000 ...."ABORTIONS"....into ....it's horrible human context....the Nazi's killed ....5,000,000 Jews in World War II ....through their ..."FINAL SOLUTION".
These are the...."FACTS"....that these 2 Democrat AZ Representatives, Mr. Arredondo and Mr. Ableser........are not ....sharing with the readers....2,750,000 Abortions performed by Planned Parenthood.
onerebel posted at 7:29 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
@ sdjtaz, It's very apparent you have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Religion. I do find it ironic that your talking about how Conservative Christians are trying to push their beliefs off on you, while arguing that they should help pay for your Liberal abortions and procedures. God has been part of our Government and Schools since the beginning of our country, and the Liberals have been pushing to remove any references from both, against the will of the majority. So do not give us any sad stories about how the will of the Mean Conservative Christians is being forced on you poor Liberals. P.S Merry Christmas !
Dale Whiting posted at 7:32 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
"That murders babies" you say. Never in the history of human kind has abortion been considered murdering. It was made illegal because early on in the 20th century abortions were leading to the deaths of women. Why don't you try reading? I recomment you start with Rowe vs. Wade. Part of the reasoning in Rowe vs. Wade to legalize abortions was based on back room abortions which were even worse!
So here is the deal. If you have not read Rowe vs. Wade, you cannot comment any further until you have.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:36 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
P.S. I favor adoption over abortion. I favor birth control over adoption. I favor abstinance over birth control. But I do not attempt to legislate my preferences over others. Making good choices, not being compelled is all things is the underlying principle here. I also favor giving women specialized healthcare over death by cancer of the cervix. Don't you? 95% of what Planned Parenthood does is saving women's lives! Or do you object to that, too?
Rich posted at 9:13 pm on Tue, Dec 6, 2011.
I don't care for abortion because one of the fetuses might be the person who answers some of the questions I've had as long as I can remember, or be the person to change the world for the better. That would be foresight, and we don't have that. In hindsight I'd say the world would be a darn sight better off had we allowed abortion for all the people who have 'Sen.' or Rep.' preceding their names before their mother gave birth. Planned Parenthood can do as they please, as far as I'm concerned, roll the dice with the human race, I'm too old to care. However, they need to do it on their dime, not mine.
sdjtaz posted at 12:40 pm on Wed, Dec 7, 2011.
@onerebel:
I don't have an issue with any type of religion. It is when individuals try to use the government to impose their beliefs on me. This is wrong whether it is conservative Christianity, LDS, Buddhism, or any other belief system. This is why the Second Amendment is in place.
Where in my post did I say that you or anyone else should be forced to pay for abortion services? Contrary to what you may believe, none of your tax dollars go to abortion services. As I said in my original post, all government monies given to Planned Parenthood goes to prevention and health care, not abortion services, as it should be. Were anyone to force you into either paying for an abortion or forcing any woman to have an abortion, I would be as angry as you are.
I also recommend that you re-read American history, since the role of God in schools and government has been at best a mixed bag. We can start with the fact that organized prayers in school is not allowed, since it is unconstitutional (darn that Second Amendment). In government, our founders talked about a "Creator" specifically avoiding language that would limit it strictly to a Christian god. The religious beliefs that our founders held ran the gamut from Christianity (John Adams) to deism (Jefferson, who actually rewrote the Bible omitting all of Christ's miracles), to athiesm (Ben Franklin, whose beliefs were wide ranging throughout his life). The one absolute that held true with most of these men, was that they wanted to avoid creating a State based religion.
Finally, I find it funny that you would mock me for arguing that I don't want to be forced to believe like Conservative Christians when you complain that you are being put upon by Scary Liberals. After all, I can at least point to the Constitution for protection against the Conservative Christian, but nowhere does the Constitution guarantee you protection against Liberalism.
P.S. I hope you have a wonderful Christmas also.
Rich posted at 6:18 pm on Wed, Dec 7, 2011.
"Contrary to what you may believe, none of your tax dollars go to abortion services."
Yes, they do. Planned Parenthood is a government supported institution and without governmental support they could not supply abortion services or any other services for that matter. 'Cooking the books' is a crime, unless the government finds it advantageous to allow the recipe. Which, in the final analysis is just using your money to buy things you don't want. Planned Parenthood should do as their conscience warrants, but in all honesty, should not take as much as a penny from the government to do so. When they do, a portion of that penny pays for everything and any thing they do, creative bookkeeping notwithstanding.
onerebel posted at 9:33 pm on Wed, Dec 7, 2011.
Regardless of whether they use my tax dollars just for building rent, it would still indirectly go to provide abortions, something I am against. Surprisingly sdjtaz you and I agree on some points. We all have the right to worship, or not, as we please. You also appear to support the 2nd amendment, George Washington said it was 2nd only to the constitution itself in importance. History was one of my best classes and I am aware of some of the unique beliefs of the founding fathers, both denying and acknowledging a God. However read the 1st amendment again, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievance". It was designed to protect those that wish to worship and those that do not EQUALLY. But the far Left has been fighting to remove references to God that have existed for hundreds of years. If the Founding Fathers wanted no references to God Why is In God We trust on our money? The Ten Commandments in the Supreme Court and other Federal buildings ? Why do we swear on a bible in court ? We are NOT trying to force anyone to pray in a school or federal building that does not wish to, however it is very apparent that those against prayer and God are trying to stop us from doing so, and infringing on our rights. You see I am guaranteed the same 1st Amendment free speech protection that you cherish, and as the Founding Fathers intended if we Americans are denied our 1st amendment rights, there is always the 2nd Amendment !
sdjtaz posted at 9:58 am on Thu, Dec 8, 2011.
Sorry, you are right, it was the 1st amendment. To answer your questions, "In God We Trust" was added to our coinage in the 1950's in response to the threat to communism. I don't argue that the Bible has no influence on our system. Swearing on the Bible is optional or not used (Many just take an oath without use of the bible). The reason for the Ten Commandments in place is historical in nature. Attempts to place them in public building where they don't already exist, however. In the majority of cases considering official posting of the Ten Commandments, the Court has extended this prohibition.
In its 1980 (Stone v. Graham) decision striking down a Kentucky law requiring that a copy of the Ten Commandments be posted in every public school classroom, the Court said:
The pre-eminent purpose for posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom walls is plainly religious in nature. The Ten Commandments are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths, and no legislative recitation of a supposed secular purpose can blind us to that fact. The Commandments do not confine themselves to arguably secular matters, such as honoring one's parents, killing or murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and covetousness. Rather, the first part of the Commandments concerns the religious duties of believers: worshipping the Lord God alone, avoiding idolatry, not using the Lord's name in vain, and observing the Sabbath Day.
Finally, I don't wish to stop you from praying, nor do I want the government to stop you from praying. I only object when you try to force the government to make me pray.
Accuracy posted at 12:59 pm on Thu, Dec 8, 2011.
onerebel"s question: If the Founding Fathers wanted no references to God Why is In God We trust on our money? . . . And sdjtaz posted: ...."To answer your questions, "In God We Trust" was added to our coinage in the 1950's in response to the threat to communism."
-------------------------------------------
Wrong…. "In God We Trust" has been on U.S. coinage since 1864 and on all paper currency since 1957.
The phrase "In God We Trust" is derived from the Bible; several psalms contain it or derivations of it (Psalms 20, Psalms 56, & Psalms 62, etc.) The final stanza of "The Star-Spangled Banner", was written in 1814 by Francis Scott Key (and later adopted as the U.S. national anthem), contains an early reference to a variation of the phrase: "...And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust'."
Less than a hundred years after its Declaration of Independence, “In God We Trust” was proclaimed. The U. S. Department of Treasury states “the motto, IN GOD WE TRUST, was placed on United States coins in1864 largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War.”
Since 1864, "In God We Trust" was adopted as the official motto of the United States in 1956. And last month, by a vote of 396-9, the House of Representatives reaffirmed our national motto “In God We Trust.”