Thank you, Senator Yankee.
The Mexico City Policy is an important piece of executive action. I support the President's ability to restrict funding for abortion for NGO's that receive Atlasian money. However, I stand in opposition to a global gag order on abortion. This restriction on NGO's is, quite frankly, onerous and does nothing to prevent abortion as a practice. Furthermore, I think restricting funding for medically necessary abortions is the wrong approach if we're trying to preserve women's health and well being.
I ask that my colleagues consider this bill as the start of a greater conversation on abortion and on Congress's role in preserving freedom of expression.
How does the gag order work exactly?
Essentially, NGO's that receive Atlasian funds are prohibited from giving information related to legal abortion services. This applies regardless whether an NGO directly provides abortions or not. Merely discussing an abortion procedure or providing information will result in an NGO losing funding from Atlasia.
The sources I've seen describe the situation like this:
These are two possible outcomes
1. Accept U.S. family planning funds and be prohibited from providing abortion counseling, referrals, or even advocacy efforts and from providing abortions outside of the three exceptions.
2. Refuse U.S. family planning funds and attempt to secure alternative sources of funding in order to keep health clinics open, continue providing a range of sexual and reproductive health services to clients, and continue advocating for law reforms to reduce unsafe abortion.
As it stands, a global gag rule is not in the best interests of women's health nor does it prevent unsafe abortions.
