Senators Vow To Block White House Effort To Defund Office Of Women’s Health
Senators Vow To Block White House Effort To Defund Office Of Women’s Health
The Washington Post reported yesterday that the FDA’s Office of Women’s Health “just had more than one-quarter of this year’s $4 million operating budget quietly removed.” The office had stood up for scientific research that ultimately led to the approval of Plan B. Because the remaining $2.8 million has already been spent or allocated, the funding cut will “effectively halt further operations for the rest of the year.”
Today, Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) wrote a letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach demanding a halt to the agency’s efforts to de-fund the office. The letter stated:
We are deeply concerned by reports that the Food and Drug Administration intends to withhold $1.2 million of funding allocated by Congress for the Office of Women’s Health (OWH). If news of this reallocation is accurate, we urge you to provide any guidance and an explanation for this action. We strongly oppose any efforts to downgrade the OWH at FDA.
For the past sixteen years, the OWH has performed vital work to improve the health and well-being of women across the United States. The OWH looks out for the day to day needs of women and promotes and monitors the progress of women’s health initiatives at the FDA. Slashing funding for the OWH would pull the rug out from under these efforts and shortchange promising efforts to improve women’s health.
We urge you to ensure that the full amount of funding that was appropriated by Congress for the OWH is set aside for that purpose, and request an immediate explanation as to how the reallocation can be averted. Congress has made its intention clear. As Congress moves forward with the budget and appropriations process, we will pursue every course to make certain that this funding is restored. We intend to use every tool at our disposal to make sure that the OWH has the resources it needs to safeguard women’s health.
The Bush administration has done little to promote — and a great deal to impede — the functions of the Office of Women’s Health. Susan Wood, former director of the OWH, resigned in 2005 over the politically-motivated delay surrounding the approval of Plan B. The administration then moved to appoint an “FDA veteran trained in animal husbandry who spent much of his career in the agency’s Center for Veterinary Medicine” to oversee the office. Fierce opposition caused the administration to reconsider that appointment.
Women’s health advocates believe the reported funding cuts are “payback” for OWH’s stance on Plan B and is the beginning of an effort to shut the office down completely.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Typical RepubliScum- if you’re an embryo or a fetus, you’re golden- once you’re born, you’re on your own, Jack-
February 28th, 2007 at 3:38 pmespecially if you’re female.
well guess I’ll just take off my shoes go back to the kitchen and get knocked up… not necessarly in that order
:o/
February 28th, 2007 at 3:42 pmI would like to see if they are really spending less this year than last year. Sounds like another one of these liberal crying jags about a reduction in the rate of growth.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:42 pmOf course it’s reprisal for OWH stand on Plan B. Anyone who doesn’t toe the party line will be punished. The Bushies are the worst kind of playground bullies – and someone needs to remind the Dems that the best way to deal with bullies is to stand up to them! It worked on my mother-in-law 30 years ago – it will work for the Dems.
Impeach Now!
February 28th, 2007 at 3:44 pmHey, hil – in the immortal words of Randy Newman – “You can leave your hat on.”
February 28th, 2007 at 3:45 pm…meanwhile hundreds of thousands of dollars are going to protect Bingo halls from terrarists….dopes
February 28th, 2007 at 3:46 pmCan’t believe they would want to de-fund an abortion mill, what’s wrong with them!!
February 28th, 2007 at 3:47 pmAll Patrick1 would have to do is read the fu*king article to answer his stupid fu*king question, but he can’t because he can only read headlines and then post stupid question, which are answered in the fu*king article. What a useless turd.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:48 pmcompassionate conservatism my ass.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:49 pmHow much funding does the Office of Men’s Health receive per year. It seems fair that they both receive the same afterall. Anyways, does anyone know how much the Office of Men’s Health get per year?
February 28th, 2007 at 3:50 pmWomen’s Health is liberal speak for abortion.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:54 pmSpudge – ignore Patrick1 – I love your responses but as my mother used to say, “It only encourages bad behavior.” If we ignore him, sooner or later he’ll get bored and go away.
Matching your wits with Patrick1’s wits is like using an uzi on a mosquito.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:55 pmnice straw man Roger… I give it an 8.25
February 28th, 2007 at 3:56 pmI would like to repost this very important sentence:
Women’s health advocates believe the reported funding cuts are “payback†for OWH’s stance on Plan B
Hmmmmm, go against this adminstration’s views, prepare for payback!
February 28th, 2007 at 3:56 pmJoe Wilson/Valerie Plame, anyone? anyone? Buehler?
pat you do know there is more to women then popping out the babies right? No… i guess you wouldnt
February 28th, 2007 at 3:57 pmRepublicans, once again, are trying “to keep women in their place”.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:00 pmPresident Bush doesn’t believe in Plan B at home or in Iraq.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:00 pm#13 No, I wasn’t trying to make an arguement. I personally think it is completely wrong to defund one sex while not the other. It is sexist in the least. I simply don’t know what the funding is for the Office of Men’s Health. Do you know #13 hil?
Women should demand and I am with them that they receive the same exact funding for the Office of Women’s Health as the men receive for the Office of Men’s health.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:01 pmSure, but this government agency, as has been stated in this thread, is about the killing of babies. They should withhold taxpayer money from such a practice. It is funny see the lefties jump up and down about the taking of innocent human life and having others pay for it. Small wonder liberalism is so morally impaired.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:02 pmPresident Bush doesn’t believe in Plan B at home or in Iraq.
Comment by Angry One
Bush also doesn’t believe in pulling out on time.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:04 pmMaybe the administration is finally deciding to implement some fiscal spending restraints. One can only hope they start cutting spending to other unnecessary programs.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:11 pmIndeed, first the abortion mills and then Amtrak.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:13 pmTwo steps away from stoning them to death.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:19 pmThe only progrma that needs cutting is the 101st Fighting Keyboardist Blog Trolling program.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:20 pmOMG,
Just did some research and found that the “Office of Men’s Health” doesn’t even exist. There is a proposal for one, but currently they don’t have one. I am retracting my initial statement. I now feel that the only thing wrong is that there is a Office of Women’s Health. This “Office” should be removed and completely defunded. To pay tax payer money for one sex and not another is completely wrong and VERY sexist. I can’t believe they actually funded it at all. This seems like an issue that the Left would be all over. This is the party that is completely against Sexism I thought. Write to congress and demand this Sexist act stop immediately. It is time that men and women are treated equally. Stop the funding for 1 sex already.
Who would be upset with the administration for removing “some” funding while men get zero? Women getting something is better then ZERO afterall.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:22 pmIndeed, first the abortion mills and then Amtrak.
Comment by Patrick1 — February 28, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
I can’t imagine anything that would induce a woman to want to have an abortion faster than finding out the child is yours!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:24 pmWell, let’s hope you fu*kers don’t block that proposal from Mike Crapo. He is a republican, so maybe you will let it go through, but I doubt it.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:26 pmRight….that’s the perfect way to totally destroy this country from the inside out – defund everything worthwhile and put all of your money into killing, maiming, and destroying someone else’s country….now that makes perfect sense! Idiots!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:31 pmAbortion is killing.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:34 pm#25 OMG Rodger!!
ok how about this. once you figure out how to oh I dont know… give birth… THEN you can give men their own Heath office.
or lets make it easier… lets name some health issues… that arent saussage related that men uniquely have to deal with.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:36 pmI am only about equality among the sex’s. To get upset about the lose of some funds while the other sex get ZERO is wrong and it smacks of sexism. How can you folks on the left even stand for it. I would think the main and only issue here is the fact that the government funds an Office for women yet no office for men. I’ll be upset about the lose of some funds for women when men actually get any funding at all. This is ridiculous. TP should be ashamed that they tried to make a story out of this while completely missing the true story that men don’t get 1 single penny.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:37 pmWhat is funny is conservatives support cuts in spending, but only to programs that help the individual. Suggest cutting money that goes to corporations and the mammoth, wasteful defense budget, and they go berserk.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:39 pmPatrick1 think abortion is killing but war for profit isn’t and the death penalty aren’t.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:41 pm#31 ROGER!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:42 pmagain I ask name one health issue unique to men that would warrent a NEED for such an office?
I do agree with this one single sentence of Roger_Roger’s.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:42 pmbuzz buzz buzz buzz. buzz buzz buzz my mommy didn’t hug me enough buzz buzz. buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz. buzz buzz buzz buzz.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:43 pmHuh.
Care to refresh my memory on how much the Iraq war’s cost, in terms of both tax dollars and civilian lives?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:43 pmWhat does this program have to do with helping individuals? Ending their life isn’t much help. War for profit is a mooreism..that has no basis in reality. The death penalty is also wrong.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:44 pmTruly surprising Brownie isn’t appointed head of this endeavor. He’s got better qualifications as a horse judge admin.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:44 pmNot sure how many civilians the fascists have killed, a large number. But I guess you are okay with that. How much should it cost to defend the country?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:45 pmbuzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz, buzz buzz buzz. I don’t actually know how to debate, so I rely on logical fallacies to “argue.” buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz. buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:51 pmIt is interesting that Patrick1 is in such denial about the huge profits being made off of the war in Iraq. He doesn’t realize that Dick Cheney’s Haliburton stock has gone up in value 4326% since the begining of the war. It is too bad that he is too stupid to realize that is called profit.
It is interesting that in his last two posts, Patrick1 has stated liberal opinions about the fascists in the White House and about the Death Penalty. He also doesn’t realize that it costs a lot less to defend a country that drops bombs on another one for 4 years. Does he not know how much 1 single bomb costs?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:51 pmNot sure how many civilians the fascists have killed, a large number. But I guess you are okay with that. How much should it cost to defend the country? Comment by Patrick1 — February 28, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
You’re a fascist – so you hate yourself? Of course you do, st*pid c*nt!
February 28th, 2007 at 5:00 pmDung_Dung
Find out what percentage of health research money the government has granted to be used with only male patients being studied in the last 100 years, then get back to us with your “arguments”.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:03 pmThe question isn’t whether or not men need a health office, but to what degree do women really need one. Are private women’s organizations incapable of raising health care questions? Does the private healthcare market not want to help women? Are they only searching for cures because government forces them to? Women don’t need the government. The whole country isn’t going to stop caring about breast cancer because of budget cuts to the Office of Women’s Health.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:07 pmThe most interesting comment I can add is …BUSH WAS FOR ABORTION BEFORE HE WAS AGAINST IT, PAID FOR THE GIRL FRIEND’S BEFORE LOVELY LAURA TO HAVE AN ABORTION…
When you can bring life into the world then you can critisize women’s issues….When you have lost your only child and know the grief and sadness of loosing the most important person in your life then and only then will I read your bull shit troll’s…Untill then STFU and be gone…..
February 28th, 2007 at 5:12 pmAs if a thinking individual can not postulate their opinion if they have not had a particular experience.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:19 pmAnyways, does anyone know how much the Office of Men’s Health get per year?
Comment by Roger_Roger —
————————————————————–
I know, but as you stated earlier to another poster.
“I WILL NOT go and tell you the link to where I got my article”
February 28th, 2007 at 5:29 pmwhile going on with your strawman earlier in the day.
This President’s FDA appointing a veterinary specialist to head the Office of Women’s Health? A Freudian slip, perhaps. Yeehaa! Brand ‘em and keep ‘em moving, Rawhide Cheney. Get them cattle to Stepford.
There are women’s issues that merit government attention, funding and support. Maternal and infant health, for one, including promoting women’s health generally, so that those who chose to can become mothers.
Let’s take a count of how many men would be here, quibbling about preferential dollars for women-only programs, if they hadn’t passed through mom’s hands.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:49 pmWell, we know WHY CHIMPya, Torticola Cheney, Rove, Gonzales, and all the “he-men” in Bushland Ober Allies HATE WOMEN–BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL QUEERS, FUDGE-PACHYDERMS, BUGGERS, and THEY LOVE THEMSELVES MOST OF ALL, WITH A LITTLE “HELP” FROM Gannon/Guckert and his stable of male whores!!!!!
February 28th, 2007 at 6:03 pmWomen don’t need the government. The whole country isn’t going to stop caring about breast cancer because of budget cuts to the Office of Women’s Health. Comment by libertarian — February 28, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
Everyone needs the government – mainly to protect us from fcuking fools like you!
February 28th, 2007 at 6:10 pmsharon – you are so right – and if you are talking about yourself, then you have my deepest sympathy.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:02 pmFor a long most of the government-funded breast cancer research was done on men, though they account for only a very small percent of this disease, which is so much more prevalent in women.
February 28th, 2007 at 8:00 pmThank you powkat, yes…And although my daughter did not die from a medical issue or the war’s it was from another persons ignorance, it is partly why I am so adametly against war’s and killing.Have alway’s been against war’s…All life is precious to me alway’s has been…On the other side of that I am a strong womens right’s activest, every woman has the right to choose….Interesting or odd to many I am sure…Blessings
February 28th, 2007 at 9:15 pmThe Office of Women’s Health should be about promoting the use of Pap Smears — early detection of cervical cancer; breast-cancer through regular mammographies; and yes, informed contraception for youg women. As the name indicates, contraception prevents the fertilitization of eggs. So does Plan B. If an egg is not fertilized, it cannot turn into an embryo, hence the hoopla raised by the knuckle-dragging, fanatically religious crackpots, is moot.
As for the few angry white males commenting on this post, they need to get some serious psychological help, befor te resort to violence against women.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:07 amTrolls like Roger_Roger and Patrick1 are all for protecting the fetus but don’t see it relation to overall female health. The US, in fact, has one of the highest maternal death rates among industrialized countries. From wikipedia:
March 1st, 2007 at 1:41 am“Maternal Mortality Ratio is the ratio of the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The MMR is used as a measure of the quality of a health care system. Sierra Leone has the highest maternal death rate at 2,000, and Afghanistan has the second highest maternal death rate at 1900 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, reported by the UN based on 2000 figures. Lowest rates included Iceland at 10 per 100,000 and Austria at 4 per 100,000. In the United States, the maternal death rate was 17 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in 2000. ”
And troll-boys, please don’t bother writing something like “But the US rate is so much better than Sierra Leone’s and Afghanistan’s (wartorn, impoverished countries);” for it is really a disgrace that for all its wealth, the American rate is more than four times that of Austria! And you guys think it’s alright to cut the budget for women’s (including mother’s) health even more, don’t you? Shame on you!
Outstanding post Lora, thank you for printing it….Blessings
March 1st, 2007 at 3:09 am…test post…
March 1st, 2007 at 3:35 pmYoU’re welcome, Sharon, and I am so sorry about the loss of your daughter. It must have been so rough.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:23 pm[...] pressure from women’s health advocates and lawmakers, the Food and Drug Administration has decided to fully fund the agency’s Office of [...]
March 18th, 2007 at 3:15 pm[...] 6:56 am by LeisureGuy Public pressure can work: Under pressure from women’s health advocates and lawmakers, the Food and Drug Administration has decided to fully fund the agency’s Office of Women’s [...]
March 19th, 2007 at 10:54 am[...] restores funding to Office of Women’s Health. Under pressure from women’s health advocates and lawmakers, the Food and Drug Administration has decided to fully fund the agency’s Office of Women’s [...]
March 19th, 2007 at 6:42 pm[...] So, progress forward is being at least attempted by the Democrats, even if Bush will fight them on every positive thing they attempt to do. But the Democrats need to get tougher. We are spending billions on this losing effort and the government treats it like play money, even as it defunds things we really need, like women’s health care! [...]
March 23rd, 2007 at 6:13 pm