Reasons why a pro-life president should want to cut off federal funds for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and its affiliates:

 Governor Mitt Romney has not proposed curtailing overall government spending for contraceptive programs.  He has, however, advocating ending federal funding specifically to Planned Parenthood.  Romney said in Ohio on October 10, “The actions I’ll take immediately is to remove funding for Planned Parenthood. It will not be part of my budget.”  
 
The question may arise why pro-life candidate for president would propose to re-direct federal monies away from one specific organization.  But for those familiar with the nature of Planned Parenthood and that organization’s deep investment in marketing abortion and resisting limitations on abortion, this should be no mystery.
 
— Planned Parenthood, a billion-dollar corporation, is the nation’s largest abortion provider, performing roughly one-fourth of all the abortions in the United States — over 329,000 abortions in 2010 alone.  (Source for the number of abortions:  PPFA annual report, 2009-2010, http://issuu.com/actionfund/docs/ppfa_financials_2010_122711_web_vf?mode=window&viewMode=doublePage
 
— 11 percent of ALL Planned Parenthood clients receive “abortion services.”  (Source:  PPFA, “By the Numbers,” 2012)
 
— According to press reports, PPFA has mandated that all of its regional affiliates must provide abortions by the end of 2012.  (Daily Caller, Dec. 23, 2010)
 
— Even if all of the PP-provided abortions were first-trimester abortions, the estimated income generated by abortion would be over $140 million/year.  But in fact, at least 11 PPFA clinics offer late abortions, some as late as 24 weeks, and these are much more expensive, so the aggregate abortion-generated income is probably actually much higher. 
 
— PPFA has spent large amounts of money lobbying against limits on abortion supported by the great majority of Americans, including the ban on partial-birth abortions, the proposed ban on sex-selection abortions, and meaningful parental notification laws.  In 2011 alone, Planned Parenthood spent $1.9 million lobbying at the federal level.  The federal taxpayer should not be subsidizing an organization with such an extreme agenda.
 
— Planned Parenthood aggressively promotes its brand name in advertising, in a substantial online presence, and in fundraisers and campaigns featuring Hollywood celebrities. Money from the government, even when it doesn’t go directly to abortion, helps to raise Planned Parenthood’s profile and especially its familiarity with those in poorer communities who come to government agencies for help.
 
— No PPFA clinic offers mammograms, despite frequent assumptions to the contrary in the press. http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2012/sep/25/karen-handel/karen-handel-seeks-set-record-straight-komen-plann/
 
— PPFA has become a highly politicized and highly partisan corporation.  Planned Parenthood’s political committees have already spent $8.3 million in federal election-related activity during the current election cycle, including the presidential race — nearly all of it, it appears, against Republicans. 
 
— Planned Parenthood has a troubling history that suggests there is a “corporate culture” of not taking serious state laws that require mandatory reporting of statutory rape and child abuse cases.  This may be a reflection of the organization’s ideology that minors have a right to engage in sexual activity and to procure abortions without parental notification or consent.  See:  http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/PlannedParenthoodEmpireWeeklyStandard.pdf
 
— Large, modern, shiny new megaclinics decorated in trendy colors are
going up all over the country, enabling Planned Parenthood to add wealthier
suburbanites to its broad customer base and process larger volumes of abortion
patients.  Why should the U.S. government “borrow money from China” that will help subsidize the continued expansion of this bloated, well-heeled abortion mega-marketing corporation?