“If you want to have a party, have a party but don’t ask me to pay for it.”
Posted: July 11, 2011 Filed under: abortion rights, fetus fetishists, Planned Parenthood, PLUB Pro-Life-Until-Birth, Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights, Republican politics, U.S. Economy, U.S. Politics, We are so F'd, Women's Rights | Tags: abortion, Birth Control, contraception, New Hampshire Executive Council, Planned Parenthood, Poverty, Raymond Wieczorek, War on Women 10 Comments
NH Executive Council with Governor Lynch
New Hampshire’s all-male Executive Council has voted to terminate the state’s contract with Planned Parenthood. As a result, Planned Parenthood will no longer be able to offer birth control services.
The Republicans that compose New Hampshire’s five-member executive council voted 3-2 to reject funding for Planned Parenthood’s six clinics in the state on June 22.
The council, a vestige of the state’s colonial government that is independent of the governor, must approve all state contracts greater than $10,000.
“I am opposed to abortion,” said Raymond Wieczorek, a council member who voted against the contract. “I am opposed to providing condoms to someone. If you want to have a party, have a party but don’t ask me to pay for it.”
Wieczorek is the second man from the right behind the Governor.
Under federal law, Planned Parenthood cannot use government funds to provide abortion, and Frizzell said it the group is subject to regular audits to ensure that only private money is used to pay for abortions.
You can read about the duties and powers of the NH Executive Council on their website here.
It sounds like the NH governor is a rather weak executive, but I don’t know that much about it.
From the Concord (NH) Monitor:
The six Planned Parenthood centers in New Hampshire stopped dispensing contraception last week after the Executive Council rejected a new contract with the organization.
Planned Parenthood had operated under a limited retail pharmacy license that was contingent on having a state contract, said Steve Trombley, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. Two weeks ago, the all-Republican Executive Council voted 3-2 against a new contract that would have provided the organization $1.8 million in state and federal money for the two years starting this month.
This will really hurt low income women in New Hampshire.
The Planned Parenthood contract, which accounts for about 20 percent of its annual New Hampshire budget, would have paid for education, distributing contraception, and the testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections. The organization’s abortion practice is paid for by private donations, Trombley said, with audits ensuring no public money is used.
Last year, Planned Parenthood provided contraception for 13,242 patients in New Hampshire, Trombley said. The organization also provided 6,112 breast exams, 5,548 screenings for cervical cancer and 18,858 tests for sexually transmitted infections. If the contract is not renewed, Planned Parenthood will drastically reduce its services, Trombley said. The organization employs 80 people in New Hampshire.
NH Planned Parenthood charges clients on a sliding scale based on yearly income. Seventy percent of clients pay nothing or a very small amount because they are under the state’s poverty line of $10,890 for an individual and $22,350 for a family.
The War on Women by the PLUBs continues unabated.
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Why are these ultra-conservative, early primary states (Iowa, NH, SC) allowed to virtually determine who our presidential candidates will be?
They all seem to hate women who step outside of the June Cleaver mold.
The women of New Hampshire need to stop letting their husbands ‘party’ until they put pressure on these nutjobs to reverse this stupid rule that endangers the health of both female and male citizens of their state.
In 2008, Democrats controlled New Hampshire. Obama fixed that.
now he is just eating peas.. 😆
Well you see — women might have SEX and they might even enjoy sex — and those men doen’t think women should be forced to endure sex except if they want and can afford a baby.
Way back when I was a kid I was taken by my mother to her fundamentalist church — and the male ministers preached a few sermons (in double talk) on the subject that only purpose of sex is for reproduction.
I’ll bet the creatures in the photo either use or have used Viagra. They are the Christian Taliban.
This is what happens when a patriarchy rules and the ERA does not exist.
Oh well another state to boycott — what comes from that horrid place anyway?
They told us that in the Catholic Church too. New Hampshire doesn’t have a lot of industry anymore. They used to have textile mills, but those went south. They used to have shoe factories, but those went overseas. Nowadays, New Hampshire is pretty much a suburb of Boston. They do have lot of huge malls and little strip malls. They have skiing and lakes, and lots of people go there for vacations. It’s very pretty and rustic.
And unlike Vermont, most of the souvenirs in New Hampshire are made in China or India. True story: I tried to find something made in New Hampshire while I was there. I went to shop after shop before finally finding some earrings made in New Hampshire at one.
djmm
Yes. Also, I am convinced these guys are terrified of sex and women. They either can’t get it up, have tiny dicks, premature ejaculate, are repelled by vaginas, are closet homosexuals, or are unable to satisfy women. (Or, I suppose, all of the above.) So, if they were to accept that sex does not have to be for procreation, then they’d have to accept their own “shortcomings.” This way, they get to claim their inability to engage in healthy sexual activity (oh my, what fun, you assholes) is normal.
What kills me is that young men, for the most part, love sex (as do women, of course). And the heterosexual male mostly relies on the female for birth control. So, each time the guy ejaculates now, he has to worry about child support. Just as with cutting Social Security and Medicare, sooner or later Republicans who are poor, or even part of the ever-dwindling middle class, are going to rise up against this BS. And, as the economy tanks, and entertainment expenses are cut way back, sex for pleasure (which is generally free) is going to take an even bigger role.
There are a economic studies now that suggest children are inferior goods. In other words, they are in higher demand for low incomes than high. That has interesting ramifications.
They all look like a bunch of mushmouths to me.
The voters of New Hampshire have to decide: are they going to put up with this or are they going to throw the bums out and let them find out what it means to be unemployed. Every woman in New Hampshire and most men should be up in arms. But they likely are not, sad to say.
djmm