Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
These records pertain to the Bush Administration's policies on abortion.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
286185885
label
Abortion (Memos)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
286185885
contentType
document
title
Abortion (Memos)
description
These records pertain to the Bush Administration's policies on abortion.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
04790-004
collections
Records of the Domestic Policy Council (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Subject Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
286185885
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
95c90d68b94a957d
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2012-2218-F
2012-2218-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Domestic Policy Council
Series:
DPC Files
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
04790
Folder ID Number:
04790-004
Folder Title:
Abortion: Memos
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
23
1
3
THE WHITE HOUSE
abortion-memos
WASHINGTON
April 9, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR DAVID Q. BATES
ROGER B. PORTER
BRIAN K. WAIDMANN
KENNETH P. YALE
JUSTINE D'ANDREA
JOHANNES KUTTNER
FROM:
DANIEL R. HEIMBACH DRH
SUBJECT:
Abortion -- the "Mexico City Policy"
Attached are excerpts taken from a legislative alert prepared by
National Right to Life.
The alert discusses a new challenge, led by the Planned
Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), against the "Mexico City
Policy." The Mexico City Policy provides that any private
organization which performs or promotes abortion in foreign
nations, or which campaigns to legalize abortion in foreign
nations, may not receive U.S. "population assistance" funds.
You will recall that the President last year vetoed the foreign
aid appropriations bill in order to block a similar attempt.
The alert reports that the House Foreign Affairs Committee has
this year already adopted an amendment, offered by Rep. Kostmayer
(D-Pa.), to the FY 1990-91 foreign aid authorization bill to
nullify the Mexico City Policy. The bill may reach the House
floor as soon as April 23.
The bill also contains language that would effectively overturn
the Kemp/Kasten Amendment, under which the U.N. Fund for
Population Affairs is ineligible to receive U.S. funds as long as
it continues to provide support for China's coercive abortion
program.
Attachment
8
national
RIGHT TO LIFE
Suite 500, 419 7th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004-2293 - (202) 626-8800
committee, inc.
LEGISLATIVE ALERT
To:
Board of Directors and State Offices, Federal Legislative Coordinators
Selected Pro-life Contacts
From:
Douglas Johnson, NRLC Legislative Director (202-626-8820)
Susan A. Smith, NRLC Associate Leg. Director (202-626-8820)
Date:
April 6, 1990
Re:
Upcoming congressional battle on the "Mexico City Policy"
and the China/UNFPA program
SUMMARY: A fresh pro-abortion challenge is now being mounted to perhaps the
single most important pro-life policy adopted during the Reagan
Administration-- the "Mexico City Policy," which cut off U.S. funds to
private foreign organizations which promote abortion or campaign for the
legalization of abortion overseas. Under the policy, the International
Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) has received no U.S. funds since 1985.
Moreover, in light of a recent federal court ruling, the Planned Parenthood
Federation of America (PPFA) also faces a cutoff of all U.S. foreign aid
funds (about $18 million/year) as of Oct. 1, 1990. In response, PPFA has
launched a last-ditch lobbying campaign for Congress to overturn the Mexico
City Policy. The House of Representatives will vote on the issue soon--
probably during the week of April 23-- with Senate action to follow soon
thereafter. Further votes on the issue may occur throughout the session.
In addition, another congressional fight is imminent on whether the U.S.
should resume funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which
has received no U.S. funds since 1985 due to its involvement in China's
coercive population-control program. Last November, President Bush vetoed
an entire foreign aid appropriations bill in order to block the Mikulski
Amendment, which would have restored U.S. funding to the UNFPA. The House
will again consider the UNFPA issue as early as the week of April 23, with
further votes likely through September.
BACKGROUND: The "Mexico City Policy" is so called because it was announced
by the U.S. delegation to an international population-control conference in
Mexico City in 1984. This policy provides that any private organization
which performs or promotes abortion in foreign nations, or which campaigns
to legalize abortion in foreign nations, may not receive U.S. "population
assistance" funds. Most "family planning" organizations in less-developed
nations have complied with the policy in order to remain eligible for U.S.
funds. Pro-abortion leaders complain that, as a consequence of the policy,
there has been "a near halt in the liberalization of abortion laws in third
world [less-developed] countries" (New York Times, Feb. 27, 1989).
The London-based International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), a major
promoter of abortion in less-developed countries, refused to comply with the
Mexico City Policy and has received no U.S. funds since 1984. The Planned
Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), which has its own overseas
division, also refused to comply, and in 1987 filed a legal challenge to the
policy. Under a court order, PPFA has continued to receive funds until this
litigation is resolved, but the funds which PPFA passes on to other
organizations overseas are governed by the Mexico City Policy. On March 7,
1990, the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York dismissed
PPFA's lawsuit. PPFA is appealing that decision to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit, where a ruling is expected by September.
If, as we anticipate, the Second Circuit also rejects PPFA's lawsuit, PPFA
faces a cutoff of all U.S. foreign aid funds as of Oct. 1, 1990.
In response, PPFA has stepped-up its lobbying campaign to have Congress
overturn the Mexico City Policy before October 1. On March 28, the House
Foreign Affairs Committee voted 17-10 in favor of an amendment, offered by
pro-abortion Rep. Peter Kostmayer (D-Pa.) to the FY 1990-91 foreign aid
authorization bill (unnumbered), to nullify the Mexico City Policy. This
bill will probably reach the House floor the week of April 23.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee also adopted another Kostmayer amendment
which would authorize $1 million in family planning funds for Romania and
require that these funds be channeled through the IPPF and the UNFPA. This
would in effect overturn the Kemp/Kasten Amendment, under which the UNFPA is
ineligible for U.S. funds because of its support for China's coercive
program.
Congressmen Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Henry Hyde (R-I1.) will offer amendments
on the House floor to protect the Mexico City Policy and to eliminate any
requirement that the UNFPA receive the funds designated for Romania.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 16, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR DAVID BATES
KEN YALE
FROM:
DAN HEIMBACH
SUBJECT:
Koop testimony
As indicated in the Cabinet Report of March 12-18, testimonv
by the Surgeon General before the House Government Operations
Subcommittee on Human Resources was expected to attract
significant adverse media attention. Although it would be
premature to make assurances about the quality of media coverage,
I am pleased to report that Administration efforts have paid off
to the extent that Koop was successfully persuaded to refrain
from comments that would reflect adversely on the White House.
The Surgeon General was cooperative in withholding any
comment implying blame for the public exposure given his letter
to the President in which he declined to offer a formal report
on the psychological effects of abortion on women. In this
regard, he only sought to explain that the press had
misrepresented his position--that he did not say there is "no"
evidence of adverse psychological health effects, only that in
his estimate there are no credible studies on which to arrive at
a scientifically reliable conclusion.
In the questioning which followed his testimony, the Surgeon
General parried several attempts to make him commit to positions
contrary to, or critical of, the Administration. In my estimate
he was successful in avoiding major controversy, and kept from
saying anything that might cause embarrassment for President
Bush.
The one weakness exposed under questioning bv Chairman
Weiss was a possible discrepancy between a claim made to the
President that "all" 250 scientific articles on the subject had
been reviewed and judged unsound, when in fact the only paper
whose conclusions were accorded written analysis and criticism
was a paper prepared by the National Right to Life organization.
Chairman Weiss interpreted this as an unmerited dismissal of
studies supporting the practice of abortion. Pro-life observers
may just as easily interpret this as an extra effort to discredit
evidence supporting their position and contrarv to abortion.
Generally speaking, the hearing went well. What began as a
potentially inflammatory situation was headed off. As a result,
the hearing itself turned out to be fairly uneventful.