GOP to Planned Parenthood: Hand over records

[mhaze]

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.

Essentially what you are asking for is the pre trial hearing where there is evidence sharing to an extent, the prosecution states the merits of their case, and if it appears to be shaky the defense asks for summary judgement (or the prosecutor may).

Congress, last I heard doesn't work that way when they do hearings. In a sense you are correct, it does not have the safeguards that crudely insure "fairness" of a legal process. So that's the system you have, and when it works against your political interests...you don't like it.

Well, what are you going to do about it? That's the system.

 

[tyr_13]

Essentially what you are asking for is the pre trial hearing where there is evidence sharing to an extent, the prosecution states the merits of their case, and if it appears to be shaky the defense asks for summary judgement (or the prosecutor may).

Congress, last I heard doesn't work that way when they do hearings. In a sense you are correct, it does not have the safeguards that crudely insure "fairness" of a legal process. So that's the system you have, and when it works against your political interests...you don't like it.

Well, what are you going to do about it? That's the system.

Oppose it of course. 'That's the system' is a huge hand wave. The Republicans who are wasting taxpayer time and money should pay, and pay in lost votes. That's the system after all. And that's why I'll speak out against boneheaded games like this.

What I'm asking for is some sort of reasonable response to the criticism that they don't have any good reason to be doing this. 'It's politics' is most certainly not a good reason. They haven't found anything with the last dozen investigations, so what makes this one different?

 

[tyr_13]

"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.

Not exactly the harassment I had in mind, but you're thinking outside the box. I like that.


That's terrible I know.

 

[Corsair 115]

The Republicans are playing politics. That's what politicians do.

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

 

[FattyCatty]

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.

I think they are, indeed, a-goin' fishing. Here's the letter from Rep. Stearns:

September 15, 2011​

Ms. Cecile Richards
President
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
434 West 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001

Dear Ms. Richards:

Pursuant to Rules X and XI of the United States House of Representatives, the Committee on Energy and Commerce is examining the institutional practices and policies of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and its affiliates, and its handling of federal funding.

The Committee has questions about the policies in place and actions undertaken by PPFA and its affiliates relating to its use of federal funding and its compliance with federal restrictions on the funding of abortion.

In order for the Committee to evaluate PPFA and its affiliates' compliance with current statutory and legal obligations, I ask that you provide the following within two weeks of the date of this letter:

1. Please provide all internal audit reports conducted by PPFA and its affiliates from 1998 to 2010. If not clearly indicated in the audit reports, please detail how much PPFA and each affiliate expended and received in Title XIX Medicaid funding, Title X family planning funding, and any other federal funding.
   
   
   • For any internal audits that uncovered instances of improper billing under federally-funded programs, please provide a description of the problem discovered, the actions taken to correct the improper billing, and the amount of money Planned Parenthood reimbursed the government.
     
     
   • Please provide documentation of PPFA and its affiliates' standards, procedures and policies that are in place to prevent and to address improper billing and/or overbilling.
   
   --------------------------------------------------
   Letter to Ms. Cecile Richards
   Page 2
   
   
2. Please provide any official documentation (written policy or procedure guides) that ensures federal money received by PPFA and its affiliates is not being used to impermissibly subsidize abortion.
   
   
3. Please provide any audits of PPFA and its affiliates that have been conducted by State agencies since 1991 that are not publicly available.
   
   
4. Please provide documentation of how many Planned Parenthood affiliates and clinics receive Title X family planning funding and provide abortion services. Include how many clinics receiving Title X funding also refer patients to other clinics even if a non-affiliated abortion provider.
   
   
5. Please provide all official written policies and procedures provided by PPFA and its affiliates that explain how to ensure compliance with federal mandates that the Title X funding each affiliate receives is segregated from its abortion business/sources of funding for abortion-related services.
   
   
6. Please describe how the segregation between family planning and abortion services is accomplished, how this segregation is monitored for compliance, and what internal audits, controls, or reviews are conducted to ensure this.
   
   
7. Please provide a summary of how PPFA detects criminal conduct and the policies and procedures in place to prevent it or report it.
   
   
8. Please provide the policies and procedures PPFA and its affiliates have in place to ensure that all Planned Parenthood clinics report all cases of suspected sexual abuse, including statutory rape, to the proper authorities.
   
   
9. Please provide the policies and procedures PPFA and its affiliates have in place to ensure that suspected sex trafficking is reported to the proper authorities.

An attachment to this letter provides additional information on how to respond to the Committee's request. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Committee staff at (202) 225-2927.

Sincerely,


Cliff Stearns
Chairman
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations​

Attachment

cc: The Honorable Henry A. Waxman, Ranking Member
---------------------------------------------------------------

RESPONDING TO COMMITTEE DOCUMENT REQUESTS​

In responding to the document request, please apply the instructions and definitions set forth below:

INSTRUCTIONS​

1. In complying with this request, you should produce all responsive documents that are in your possession, custody, or control or otherwise available to you, regardless of whether the documents are possessed directly by you.

<snip>

 

[Ziggurat]

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.

As far as I know, they are subject to special audits, if Congress should ever choose to do so. How or why should they be categorically exempt? I certainly never suggested they should be.

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.

Again with the "should". People should be nice. But they frequently aren't. Government should be staffed with only competent politicians and bureaucrats who have only our best interests at heart. But it isn't. The complaints in this thread amount to people getting upset when they're confronted with this fact.

We're asking for fair strings here

And that's a naive request. You're never going to get it. The best you can ever hope for is strings that favor you, but even that is only ever temporary.

They're wasting time. They're wasting our money.

That's what government does. You think that's new? Of course not. The only difference is now it's your ox that's being gored.

They aren't addressing the things they insist are more important. These are legitimate complaints.

I didn't say there weren't legitimate complaints about what's going on. But they're the same complaints that basically always apply to government. So if you want to complain less about government, try this on for size: have less government to complain about.

 

[Ziggurat]

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

What, you're just now discovering that they don't?

Welcome to adulthood. It's sometimes disappointing.

 

[johnny karate]

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

First you deny:

Oh, my gosh, you are so wrong.

And then you immediately reiterate exactly what I said:

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

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

You should make up your mind. It will make your posts at least approach being comprehensible.


Speaking of incomprehensible:

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.

I'm not sure what "illegal campaign donates" means or to which transcripts you are referring. Very little of your post made sense.

 

[johnny karate]

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.

You started out by stating that anyone who accepts government money has no reasonable expectation to privacy.

Then you denied this should be viewed as a loss of rights.

Then you just dismissed the whole thing.

I'm sorry if you feel I unfairly represented your argument - whatever it was meant to be - but it was kind of all over the map.

 

[Quinn]

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

Apparently you missed the development where election campaigns begin roughly 12 hours after the previous election has been completed. Sometimes even earlier; I'm fairly sure there's some 2016 presidential campaigning going on even as we speak.

 

[leftysergeant]

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

Dude, the GOP doesn't do the "G" word. It's against their religion.

 

[BenBurch]

You didn't give any reason to think the regular auditing would have been insufficient. You just said that was your concern. What is that concern based on?

I can tell you. His concern is based solely upon PP being opposed by his political faction. He never has anything that does not go back to what Fox News has been telling him to believe.

 

[BenBurch]

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

Republicans are not interesting in governing.

They want the Union destroyed.

 

[Ziggurat]

Republicans are not interesting in governing.

They want the Union destroyed.

Democrats are not interested in governing.

They want to kill black babies.

Gee, this whole paranoid hyperbole game you invented is fun!

 

[Wildy]

You know, there's a very effective method that PP could use to ensure such confidentiality against the federal government:

Stop accepting federal funding.

When you accept money from the government, you lose freedom. When government is populated by those you like, the chains may weigh lightly. But governments change. And the chains which once were light can become heavy very quickly. Is that simply the fault of government, or do those who accept the chains have some responsibility for their own servitude?

So in essence you want to take away the rights of the people who use PP simply because that organisation uses government money?

And this doesn't bother you at all?

If that separate of facilities is uniform and accounted for I can't see why they would have problems.

Wait...actually I can...It's the existence of a radical minority of people, many of whom work at PP, who have opinions such as that bolded above.



That certainly COULD create a situation where you'd want periodic audits for compliance with government law and regulation, because various people have explicitly stated they didn't believe in said law and regulation.

And what exactly is wrong with that opinion? Is it a problem because it doesn't agree with your own beliefs?

And how does holding an opinion mean that people are going to act on it?

 

[leftysergeant]

They want to kill black babies.

Where is your proof of that? Sounds more like another republicon rant to divide the Democratic Party against itself.

You all are probably more upset that so many white women are choosing not to have babies.

 

[sarge]

So in essence you want to take away the rights of the people who use PP simply because that organisation uses government money?

He may hold that opinion, but I don't believe that is what he has expressed in this thread, nor is it necessarily true that any persons rights are in danger from this audit.

He has claimed that, in the absence of proof that it is not a fishing expedition, we should assume that this request for documents proceeds from some reasonable beliefe that PP has improperly used tax dollars to fund abortions. Considering the overt Republican desire to defund PP, that claim is moronic. This is clearly a fishing expedition.

What doesn't make sense is why anyone would feel compeled to argue otherwise. That it is an attempt to cast a wide net in hopes of finding PP in violation is not indictable. It is perfectly appropriate for a political party to use political means to oppose something they were elected to oppose.

Of course, it is also perfectly appropriate to oppose such opposition, and to work to make the party suffer at the ballot box for their pig-headedness.

 

[excaza]

I thought the time to play politics was during an election campaign. The rest of the time I thought politicians were supposed to, you know, govern.

A politician's job is to get re-elected, not to govern.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

What doesn't make sense is why anyone would feel compeled to argue otherwise. That it is an attempt to cast a wide net in hopes of finding PP in violation is not indictable. It is perfectly appropriate for a political party to use political means to oppose something they were elected to oppose.

Of course, it is also perfectly appropriate to oppose such opposition, and to work to make the party suffer at the ballot box for their pig-headedness.

That's the thing that I don't get in a lot of these discussions (of the politicians) that they use double-speak even when speaking to "their own". Why not be clear that they want to see the abortion side of PP ended (or perhaps all of it if that is what they want) and say they want to see if it has been misappropriating Fedral funds. The dishonesty seems to be so deep that they can't admit to themselves what they are trying to do! (ETA) And the real mystery is why do they do this when they don't get any benefit from being dishonest? Those that will vote for them because of them "going after" PP will vote for them anyway, those who don't want this to happen will still not vote for them no matter how they try to dishonestly spin it.

 

[sarge]

That's the thing that I don't get in a lot of these discussions (of the politicians) that they use double-speak even when speaking to "their own". Why not be clear that they want to see the abortion side of PP ended (or perhaps all of it if that is what they want) and say they want to see if it has been misappropriating Fedral funds. The dishonesty seems to be so deep that they can't admit to themselves what they are trying to do! (ETA) And the real mystery is why do they do this when they don't get any benefit from being dishonest? Those that will vote for them because of them "going after" PP will vote for them anyway, those who don't want this to happen will still not vote for them no matter how they try to dishonestly spin it.

I'd go even further. Not only do they not benefit from being dishonest, I believe they would benefit from being honest about their motives.

Republicans are elected to accomplish certain things. Among them, ending abortion ranks high. I would think that, rather than try to deny the obvious, Republicans would expend considerable effort to make it known that they are going to incredible lengths to make abortions very difficult to get.