GOP to Planned Parenthood: Hand over records

[The Fallen Serpent]

????

Part of the committee's requests are FOR THE RECORDS OF THE AUDITS. I suppose they will review them and see if there is reason to go further or not.

The transcripts of the proceedings will be online, and I'm sure the video will be on youtube.

And by the way, I don't feel any compulsion to respond to demands from you. If you don't like my comments, don't converse with me. I'll bring specific facts in when I choose, as can anyone.

From the OP link

Due by the end of the month: internal audits of how much Planned Parenthood received and spent in government money from 1998 to 2010. Stearns also requests any state audits of PPFA for the last 20 years that have not been made public, as well as a description for how "segregation between family planning and abortion services is accomplished," and how the practice is monitored for compliance.

My questions are: What is lacking in the FEDERAL audits which are supposedly done yearly? What if the internal corporate audits include sensitive patient information? What do state audits from the past 20 years have to do with this if this is about Federal funding?

 

[mhaze]

From the OP link

My questions are: What is lacking in the FEDERAL audits which are supposedly done yearly? What if the internal corporate audits include sensitive patient information? What do state audits from the past 20 years have to do with this if this is about Federal funding?

Good question. First thing comes to my mind is to compare the state and federal, look for discrepancies that indicate lying and or fraud. And you'd be looking for a long term consistent pattern of it with knowledge by the main guys, not just an occasional error. Also the donations by these guys to the Democratic party, I believe there are thought to be some issues in that.

I don't think as alleged here that any of the players want to "Shut down PP", but there are definitely some that want to cut off the spigot of federal funding. This could all just be for show, they may have already decided to do that after taking the Senate next year, and just want some backup as to why. Again, just a guess.

Don't criticize me for not being specific or factual, wait for the transcripts and read them to establish what the various players are doing and saying.

Oh, by the way regarding that "sensitive patient information", read the law on any of a number of such privacy issues, you'll always see that although the law applies to "you and me", it doesn't apply to Big Brother, his arms, legs, toes or pet alligators...So that's basically not an issue, although you might argue it darn well should be.

 

[leftysergeant]

If any republicon piece of crap demands that any records containing patient names or cvontact information be turned over, that person should be removed from any public office for the rest of his life.

That HAS, after all, been part of the aggenda of the thugs who have brought this up at a state level in the past and it is a step toward tyranny.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

First thing comes to my mind is to compare the state and federal, look for discrepancies that indicate lying and or fraud.

But lacking any evidence of such fraud, why would you suspect it? And do you really think the motivation for this audit is to ferret out fraud and not ideology?

They tried to get funding to PP cut off (and played brinksmanship with the federal budget over it), but still failed. So now they're trying less direct means--just as the Hyde Amendment itself is a next-best choice to the outright prohibition of abortion.

 

[Shalamar]

Seems like a criticism of PP funding is that even if not a dime of federal finding goes to Abortions, it means that the Federal funding allows PP to use other sources to apply towards Abortion, which means that PP uses Federal Funding for Abortions in an indirect way, and therefor PP should be dismantled.

Or something.

 

[FattyCatty]

So the Democrats are fighting back on the Committee. From the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats

September 27, 2011

Today Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry A. Waxman and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Ranking Member Diana DeGette sent a letter to Chairman Cliff Stearns questioning the basis for his far-reaching investigation of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

In the letter, Reps. Waxman and DeGette question whether "Planned Parenthood is being singled out as part of a Republican vendetta against an organization that provides family planning and other medical care to low-income women and men. … The HHS Inspector General and state Medicaid programs regularly audit Planned Parenthood … These audits have not identified any pattern of misuse of federal funds, illegal activity, or other abuse that would justify a broad and invasive congressional investigation."<snip>

From the letter:

September 27, 2011​

The Honorable Cliff Stearns
Chairman
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
House Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Stearns:

We are writing regarding your September 15, 2011, letter opening a far-reaching investigation into Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates. We question the basis for the investigation and whether Planned Parenthood is being singled out as part of a Republican vendetta against an organization that provides family planning and other medical care to low-income women and men.

Your letter states that the “Committee is examining the institutional practices and policies of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates, and its handling of federal funding.” It then makes an extraordinarily broad and burdensome request for documents. The letter asks Planned Parenthood and all 83 of its affiliates for internal audit reports covering up to a 12-year period; for state audits covering a 20-year period; for detailed information about any improper billing; and for sensitive information about the services and referral practices of Planned Parenthood affiliates and clinics.

The letter also requests information about billing practices; segregation of funds; and policies and procedures in place with regard to criminal conduct, sexual abuse, and sex trafficking.

We are aware of no predicate that would justify this sweeping and invasive request to Planned Parenthood. The HHS Inspector General and state Medicaid programs regularly audit Planned Parenthood and report publicly on their findings. These audits have not identified any pattern of misuse of federal funds, illegal activity, or other abuse that would justify a broad and invasive congressional investigation.
<snip>

The letter sure makes it sound as though the Republicans are on a fishing expedition.

 

[johnny karate]

At this point, I don't find that criticism particularly credible. It sounds like the sort of thing people panic about but doesn't actually happen.

Yeah, because the last thing we want to do is foment hysteria and controversy without substantiation while the Republicans are busy trying to foment hysteria and controversy without substantiation.

Let's just all stick our heads in the sand and assume this baseless witch hunt won't have any deleterious effects on the privacy of Planned Parenthood's patients. I'm sure everything will work out just fine.

 

[mhaze]

But lacking any evidence of such fraud, why would you suspect it? And do you really think the motivation for this audit is to ferret out fraud and not ideology?

They tried to get funding to PP cut off (and played brinksmanship with the federal budget over it), but still failed. So now they're trying less direct means--just as the Hyde Amendment itself is a next-best choice to the outright prohibition of abortion.

Well, Joe, I'm just answering the question as to what purpose those records might be put to. You second assertion, bolded, is nonsense because it doesn't result in any illegality to prosecuted, while mine does or does not in a straightforward manner. I guess your ideological perspective of their ideological perspective doesn't interest me.

Did they break law? Get records, cross check it out, summarize, actionable or not, next subject.

Intrade shows Republicans to take the Senate > 70%, so they'll cut funding if they want to and don't need a dog and pony show now to do that. It's just a matter of slipping one page into a 700 page bill at the last moment, right?

My guess is that there are a whole lot of very rationale Republicans who don't have any interest in cutting off funding to PP unless they have clear evidence of some serious wrongdoing. That's the way I'd approach it, since I couldn't care less about abortion one way or the other, but the Hyde Amendment is law, and it should be followed.

Again, get the hearing transcripts and read them, no need to speculate on the Internet about it.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yeah, because the last thing we want to do is foment hysteria and controversy without substantiation while the Republicans are busy trying to foment hysteria and controversy without substantiation.

The Republicans are playing politics. That's what politicians do. You're free to play politics too, but that doesn't give me a reason to care.

Let's just all stick our heads in the sand and assume this baseless witch hunt won't have any deleterious effects on the privacy of Planned Parenthood's patients. I'm sure everything will work out just fine.

This framing presumes that there IS some reason to worry about privacy. But it doesn't actually provide one. Why should I be worried that anyone's privacy will be compromised? Because somebody said I should be worried? That's a recipe for living a life of perpetual panic and paranoia. Thanks, but no thanks. Give me a real reason to worry, or I just won't. I've got better things to spend my energy on.

 

[mhaze]

So the Democrats are fighting back.....as though the Republicans are on a fishing expedition.

So they are fighting back by making it sound like it's a fishing expedition?

Sorry, color me unimpressed. I'll wait for the facts.

 

[johnny karate]

So they are fighting back by making it sound like it's a fishing expedition?

Sorry, color me unimpressed. I'll wait for the facts.

What facts have been presented to you that make you think it's not a fishing expedition?

 

[johnny karate]

The Republicans are playing politics. That's what politicians do. You're free to play politics too, but that doesn't give me a reason to care.

This framing presumes that there IS some reason to worry about privacy. But it doesn't actually provide one. Why should I be worried that anyone's privacy will be compromised? Because somebody said I should be worried? That's a recipe for living a life of perpetual panic and paranoia. Thanks, but no thanks. Give me a real reason to worry, or I just won't. I've got better things to spend my energy on.

You've made your lack of concern for what happens to other people quite clear, and no one is saying you are required to feel otherwise.

 

[leftysergeant]

So they are fighting back by making it sound like it's a fishing expedition?

Sorry, color me unimpressed. I'll wait for the facts.

They have already set that scumbag O'Keefe loose on them. Now the publiuc memory is tainted and it looks to some people like this is another nest of vipers like the little pimp told them ACORN was.

THey are screwing with our minds again.

Say you want to accuse PP of actually sheltering humnan trafficers and child abusers like the pimp and the slduge monster allege.

You need to see patient records.

And can we trust scum bags like them not to exploit those records in an abusive manner and make life miserable for women who have used PP services?

Hell no.

 

[mhaze]

What facts have been presented to you that make you think it's not a fishing expedition?

Ok, I'll bite.

The Honorable Cliff Sterns, in his demand letter, didn't say...

"We're on a fishing expedition so..."
​

Ask an idiotic question, get an idiotic answer.

 

[johnny karate]

Ok, I'll bite.

The Honorable Cliff Sterns, in his demand letter, didn't say...

"We're on a fishing expedition so..."
​

Ask an idiotic question, get an idiotic answer.

No facts required for Cliff Stearns then. His accusations are good enough for you.

But anyone denying those accusations? Well, that's a different matter. Suddenly, judgment cannot be rendered until all the "facts" are in.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Quite the reverse: it rather drives home the point that when you accept federal dollars, they come with strings attached, and if the feds want to pull those strings, you've got no choice but to dance.

I guess some folks need to be reminded of one of Thomas Jefferson's observations:

A government that can give you what you want is powerful enough to take it whenever it wants.

Most people don't get that.

 

[Darth Rotor]

'If you have nothing to hide, why don't you let me search your medical records.'

'If you have nothing to hide, why can't I search your car?'

'If you have nothing to hide, why can't I view your chat log?'

'If you have nothing to hide, why can't I search all the records of your church?'

How many times does one need to be audited and searched before it becomes harassment?

"If you have nothing to hide, show me your tits. I promise you, they are not nothing, and should not be hidden, so you can't have nothing to hide, ergo, don't hide them."



Tits, inherently good.

Seventy million babies a day agree with me.

 

[Ziggurat]

You've made your lack of concern for what happens to other people quite clear

I see you have chosen to stop discussing the topic at hand, and resort merely to personal attacks against me. Attacks which aren't even true, but since what I actually say seems to have little impact on how you respond, there seems little point in detailing your errors.

 

[tyr_13]

I see you have chosen to stop discussing the topic at hand, and resort merely to personal attacks against me. Attacks which aren't even true, but since what I actually say seems to have little impact on how you respond, there seems little point in detailing your errors.

Do you agree that all the groups receiving funding as Faith Based initiatives should be subjected to Congressional special audits as well then, whether or not there is any evidence of malfeasance? They're getting government funds as well.

Yes, government funds come with strings. One of those strings should not be continued harassment by one faction inside the government who can't get enough popular support to de-fund the group otherwise. Groups shouldn't be singled out unless there is evidence more attention is warranted. We're asking for fair strings here, strings we all agreed on originally. Not new hidden ones year after year after year.

They're wasting time. They're wasting our money. They aren't addressing the things they insist are more important. These are legitimate complaints.

 

[mhaze]

No facts required for Cliff Stearns then. His accusations are good enough for you.....

Oh, my gosh, you are so wrong.

Generally, when something like this begins, they really do know something.

I don't need to second guess the guy like you are doing.

What might it be? Sheesh, it could be about illegal campaign donates and not the abortion thing at all. Why speculate?

Read the hearing transcripts, argue based on facts, not speculation.