In the Dec. 1 letter “Stop funds for abortion, clinics,” the author suggests this as a way to help with the state budget deficit.
I think he has his M’s and his B’s confused. Cutting the $7 million of state funding to support Planned Parenthood would do little to reduce the state’s $2 billion deficit. If the state budget were his concern, I believe he would support continued funding.
If these desperate women were unable to terminate their unwanted pregnancy, a fair percentage would be forced to rely on the state for prenatal and birthing expenses. And then, as a mother with now limited options, on Medicaid and public assistance. This does not include the possible effects on an unwanted child with limited resources.
I don’t think the author had the state budget in mind, but rather a pro-life agenda.
I have no problem with his beliefs, only the way he misrepresented them.