Caving to right-wing flailing and conservatives’ anti-abortion fear machine, President Obama is reportedly pressuring House Democrats to strip family planning funding from its economic recovery proposal — even though it would potentially save $700 million over 10 years.
This afternoon, MSNBC’s David Shuster pressed Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) about the provision, pointing out that it would help relieve states of some health care costs. Apparently unable to respond, Hutchinson launched a reflexive and knee-jerk attack on the recovery plan, defaulting to the first opposition point she could think of:
SHUSTER: When you give them [states] money to help with Medicare, it means that the states that have to balance their own budgets won’t have to spend as much of their own money to try to pour into Medicare because people are hurting.
HUTCHISON: Well, one of the big problems I have with this bill is that you don’t know which states it’s going to, there’s no allocation, it’s just going to be in the agencies and the bureaucracies to make these decisions.
With the family planning provision now off the table, Hutchison seemed desperate to find another reason to oppose the bill. However, the claim she stumbled onto — that “there’s no allocation” of the recovery funds — is laughably inaccurate. USA Today clearly broke down where the $200 billion in state aid would go (click through for state-by-state details):
The truth is that despite Obama’s compromise efforts, the right wing will always find a bogus reason to oppose the recovery plan, whether it’s too few corporate tax cuts, too little payback to the rich, or too much grass on the National Mall.